Bitcoin Forum
June 23, 2018, 08:08:05 PM *
News: Latest stable version of Bitcoin Core: 0.16.1  [Torrent]. (New!)
 
  Home Help Search Donate Login Register  
  Show Posts
Pages: « 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 [29] 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 ... 81 »
561  Economy / Speculation / Re: Wall Observer - MtGoxUSD wall movement tracker - Hardcore on: May 01, 2013, 01:23:04 PM
If you are so sure of that bitcoin is going down, all you need to do, is:

- Pay me BTC100
- Make sure you have enough fiat to buy BTC500 when you believe it is time to sell them to me
-  Huh
- Profit

What a sorry douche you are, not possessing even BTC100 and understanding that if you did, you could easily call me on this one. Now all you can do is drool on your keyb,
562  Economy / Speculation / Re: Wall Observer - MtGoxUSD wall movement tracker - Hardcore on: May 01, 2013, 01:13:57 PM
I'm not taking rpietila's offer because I think I'm comfortable as is, without needing to leverage. I have about 80 dollars on MtGox per every BTC I have (including everything I have in cold storage). If the price goes up, my Bitcoins rise in value. If the price goes down, I have an opportunity to purchase more bitcoins at a reduced price.

that's how you manage risk. good job. lizardman is gonna swallow some hilarious losses if he really is all-in.

edit: or at least miss out on bitcoin-denominated profit by having no fiat as the price moves down. does anyone know what his base price is?
563  Economy / Speculation / Re: Arepo's Detailed Price Analysis and Projections on: May 01, 2013, 01:06:57 PM

and as always, if you profit from me, help keep it free! consider my presentation of analysis here a donation of my time and skills. feel free to tell me what you think it's worth! (address in sig).

--arepo

Well, right now I'm just holding. But if I do start trading using your advice I'll definitely share my profits if and when I see them, and I'd encourage others to do so as well. It's hard to put a number on good advice, but a percentage of my profits, no matter how big or small, is definitely worth it.

no pressure, donations are optional Tongue

i wish you the best of luck. Smiley

--arepo
564  Economy / Speculation / Re: Wall Observer - MtGoxUSD wall movement tracker - Hardcore on: May 01, 2013, 01:06:03 PM
all in

well, you're clearly a professional Roll Eyes

learn2managerisk
565  Economy / Speculation / Re: Wall Observer - MtGoxUSD wall movement tracker - Hardcore on: May 01, 2013, 12:59:52 PM
Quote
I, for example, don't think we will see $115 ever again

Is this same supernode bullshitter who said we will never see 140$ again week ago...

You really enjoy making a cunt off yourself though that is not really hard thing to do, you have it in yourself . What a pathetic moron you are, lol

i said it before and i'll say it again, lizardman, take your allegedly huge chunk of capital and park it at $120 if you want to have a chance at this bet.
566  Economy / Speculation / Re: does price manipulation break standard methods of TA? on: May 01, 2013, 12:58:20 PM
2: Will tend to play out in a predictable direction. (To the manipulator, yet unpredictable from TA),

i appreciate the fullness of your response, and i have been keeping this question in the back of my head since i opened the thread. more deliberation and analysis needs to be done before i can honestly respond to your many other hypotheses. but for now, this one sticking point:

i opened this thread with the hypothesis that "TA-appropriate moves" maximize the profit/risk equation. you've brought up many good points why this may not be the case.

however, the quoted point above speaks to a very important feature of this problem, that is the feature of the information that the players have.

we all can agree, i hope, that the manipulator does not know, with any certainty, how the market will react to his attempt at manipulation. the best he can do, just like every other participant, is to guess. doesn't this alone invalidate all theories of direct price manipulation?

--arepo
567  Other / Off-topic / Re: $1 Trillion Bitcoin on: May 01, 2013, 12:46:51 PM
You need to keep your story straight. Is light what something IS, or is it what something DOES? It is a noun or a verb? See the problem?

you make a good point, and it is entirely summed up here. i know that this distinction is confusing, but if you think about it, it is literally the only way we make sense of anything. "a particle is a small localized object" is not a rigorous definition, that is a laymans definition, and a bit of a strawman.

for example, if i asked "what is a mammal?" you could say "an animal that has fur and gives live birth".

ah-hah! but what is an animal? what is fur? what is an electron/photon/etc. catch my drift?

we don't know what a force, or energy, or anything really, what it is. but we can identify properties of things that can be consistently shown to be valid. this is the strength of science and is precisely what distinguishes it from pseudoscience. most of what you've said before this has been horribly off-target, and i'm not going to fault you for it because you simply do not have the background in physics, but you must at least concede to that point. the models are not simple. they do not seem rigorous when put in layman's terms. but they identify properties consistently, and that is what allows for science to work.

short answer -- light isn't a 'thing', it is what it does, i.e. how it behaves. light is an idea, just like 'bitcoin', like 'animal', like 'math'. it is a figment of our imagination. but don't tell me that we don't have consistent definitions.

also, a good counter-point to the 'oh it works that's engineering'. it was advances in particle/atomic physics that led directly to the development of the atomic bomb. it was our 'nonsense' models of the workings of an atom, which no one has ever seen, but whose properties we knew well enough to manipulate the system to our ends. if physics were not consistent, we would not have been able to do this.

Also: please don't assume I'm speaking from a position of ignorance just because I appear to disagree with you and your authority figures.

p.s. no such assumptions have been made. most of what we're discussing (high school level physics), i have verified through the scientific process with my own hands. literally. no authority necessary. that being said, it is a safe bet that you are indeed speaking from a position of ignorance of these things, precisely because you needed me to supply to definition for something like a 'wave'. not faulting you at all for this ignorance, but i do fault you for refusing to concede that you are ignorant of the things you're talking about.
568  Economy / Speculation / Re: Wall Observer - MtGoxUSD wall movement tracker - Hardcore on: May 01, 2013, 12:34:40 PM
15 minute EMA crossing to the upside.

on that small of a scale, it's going to be very bumpy. of course we're not heading straight down -- price doesn't move that way. the graph i posted here was a weekly scale -- and i'm confident we'll at least test the $120 resistance before the week is out. also, trading on a single indicator is a bad idea  Tongue
569  Economy / Speculation / Re: Wall Observer - MtGoxUSD wall movement tracker - Hardcore on: May 01, 2013, 12:25:47 PM
Nope because we will going down Smiley

i wish it weren't so, but he could be shown to be right pretty soon... the wall will fall Cry

Based on your graphs and triangles and predictions, it almost seems like we should be doing the opposite of what you say  Cheesy

the triangle seems bullish to you?
570  Economy / Speculation / Re: Wall Observer - MtGoxUSD wall movement tracker - Hardcore on: May 01, 2013, 12:23:59 PM
Nope because we will going down Smiley

i wish it weren't so, but he could be shown to be right pretty soon... the wall will fall Cry
571  Economy / Speculation / Re: Arepo's Detailed Price Analysis and Projections on: May 01, 2013, 12:21:46 PM
I also want to thank you for your contributions. At the moment, you're one of the very few that I listen to on this forum. And I'm slowly picking up some TA understanding as well. Keep it up!

i'm happy that so many people are coming out of the woodwork like this Smiley it really motivates me to continue being active in this thread, even though the price report has expired.

and as always, if you profit from me, help keep it free! consider my presentation of analysis here a donation of my time and skills. feel free to tell me what you think it's worth! (address in sig).

--arepo
572  Other / Off-topic / Re: $1 Trillion Bitcoin on: May 01, 2013, 12:10:26 PM
Quote
a wave is defined as any phenomenon which can be modeled by a function of the form f(kr - wt)

Remember I said that the definitions have be able to be used consistently? You cannot define a wave as a "phenomenon," then turn around and say, as your source does, "More than any other concept, physicists are finding that waves characterize the structure of the universe." This is speaking metaphorically. I'm asking for rigorous definitions that are applied consistently. Physics has few, if any. It will call light a wave phenomenon, but then speak of photons as "particles." What is a particle? No consistent definition. It's supposed to be a little ball? No? Infinitely small? "No size"? All of the above Wink

this is ridiculous. light is a wave phenomenon because it has the property that is given in the above definition and for no other reason. there is no metaphor, there is no equivocation. in fact, ANYTHING that has that property is considered a wave. this is the very definition of consistency.

Quote
Unfortunately, "momentum" and "mass" are ill-defined, making this definition ill-defined as well.

they are, too! they are just as straightforwardly and rigorously defined as 'force' and 'wave'. you can add 'particle' to this list as well.

at this point you're simply posting demonstrably incorrect statements, and i'm not sure if i'm supposed to supply every single definition which you claim does not exist? can't you google these things yourself? instead of replying to me, please double-check your claims and identify a source that agrees with your assessments of physics, perhaps? it'll save us both time. or maybe just me. Tongue

again, you don't seem to have very much background in even high-school level physics, so i really don't understand why you feel so confident as to make all these grand proclamations about it in any sense?

you're doing the same thing as the people who write off bitcoin "because it is obviously a scam" or "because deflationary currency is idiotic", which, as a clearly avid bitcoin user, puts you firmly in the category of hypocrite.

good day, sir.


p.s. i'm not sure how you did it, but every single one of the following statements is categorically and demonstrably incorrect. please learn a god damned thing about what you're talking about, you're wasting everybody's time.

["force" or "gravity"] [are] nonsense terms, or inconsistently used ones that make utterances using them nonsense - take your pic. Physics is thus rendered pseudoscience. If you ask a physicist why an apple falls to the ground, they'll tell you "gravity pulls it down." Might as well just cut to the chase and say "God did it." There is no educational value in such statements. We learn nothing we didn't know before.
573  Economy / Speculation / Re: Arepo's Detailed Price Analysis and Projections on: May 01, 2013, 11:58:05 AM
You sure? I don't understand much TA but all I see is a bunch of oscillations converging around 130.



PS Thanks for your posts, I find them both helpful and entertaining

appreciate the thanks Smiley

and yes, triangles are one of the fractal patterns found in price, so there are often triangles-within-triangles. visible on the scale you have, we do seem to be consolidating as well, and in fact we're in a smaller, flat-bottomed triangle with support at $120 and a descending top from $160. can you see it?

--arepo
574  Economy / Speculation / Re: Wall Observer - MtGoxUSD wall movement tracker - Hardcore on: May 01, 2013, 11:53:14 AM
Markets are strange beasts, they like to thoroughly sample every price up and down, lots and lots of times.

The market explored the area $90-$95 very well, (just like before the April 11th peak). It then shot from $97 to $135 very quickly. Although it has explored back to $125 quite well, it has not done the region $97 to $125 since. It seems like it wants to spend time in that range, at least around $115, before the next main trend kicks off.

that seems to be where we're heading:

Time frame?

you should be able to estimate from the scale of the triangle -- so before the end of the week.


575  Economy / Speculation / Re: Silk road down for over 24 hours now. on: May 01, 2013, 11:52:03 AM
Ah, thank you for that (detailed) explanation. Great contribution to the community ^.^
That is very interesting, my knowledge does not go past market depth at the moment Tongue.
I will have to look into that more, bit confused on the Y-axis units and how they relate to each other.

Does an equilibrium exist on these graphs? Again Iím not sure on how they are calculated so Iím not sure how to tell.

no problem Wink

in regards to the Y-axis:

oscillators are usually rational transforms of price and volume data -- that is they look like fractions, having the form N/D for some N(price, volume) and D(price, volume).

this allows them to move within a fixed range for any (price, volume) input: 100 to 0, or 0 to -100. this would make the equilibrium or 'neutral' point the midline -- 50 on the RSI and -50 on the William's oscillator.

it'll take time to familiarize yourself with what the figures represent, but they can be very useful.

i hope my follow up worked for further clarification.

--arepo
576  Other / Off-topic / Re: $1 Trillion Bitcoin on: May 01, 2013, 11:44:33 AM
Or if some kind of definition is given, it cannot be used consistently in the field. It cannot be used without equivocation. It cannot be used unless it is malleable enough for the physicist to speak out of both sides of his or her mouth, just like a theologian talking about God. This is the problem. Heisenberg and others simply doubled down on the inanity, enshrining it as a virtue.

i'm sorry, but you've just shown me that you have little to no understanding of how science works.

if the quoted were true, then it wouldn't work at all, as its virtue comes directly from its consistent applicability and nowhere else -- and so we'd have no computers to even communicate with, or GPS, or satellites at all, or cars, or phones, or microwave ovens, demos like Newton's Cradle wouldn't work consistently, and if 'force'  and 'gravity' were something really so arbitrary, you'd best be afraid of arbitrarily floating off of the ground because clearly the maths involved are not consistent, are mere figments of human imagination, and are susceptible to dissolution at any time.

please, please, please obtain a better understanding of things before you project your malformed assessments. i hope this is the last word on this off-topic rant.
577  Other / Off-topic / Re: $1 Trillion Bitcoin on: May 01, 2013, 11:38:08 AM
I'm not sure if you noticed, but although your source has little sections called "Definition," no actual definitions are given (I looked at "force" and "wave," specifically). This is the problem.

Quote
a wave is defined as any phenomenon which can be modeled by a function of the form f(kr - wt)

that was easy.

as for force, the definition is not as rigorous or explicit, but it does have an entry for Newton's Second Law, which is the rigorous definition, so i'll give that:

Quote
Newton's Second Law: The time rate of change in momentum is proportional to the applied force and takes place in the direction of the force.

otherwise formulated as:

Quote
F = ma

so, it follows that:

a force is defined as the thing that causes a change in momentum (of a massive body), and is proportional to the magnitude of the resulting acceleration.

these are "not actual definitions"? Huh

i think you need to double-check your own definitions, including the definition of 'definition', and that of 'nonsensical', too.

Quote
I have my degree in pure mathematics, which is in many cases just as nonsensical as physics.
578  Economy / Speculation / Re: Silk road down for over 24 hours now. on: May 01, 2013, 11:26:38 AM
the market was also severely overbought short- and long-term.

Can you explain this to me?

of course. Smiley

'overbought' and 'oversold' signals are usually given by oscillators, a special kind of technical indicator.

oscillators measure something that is comparable to the intuitive notion of the 'momentum' of price. since a general rule of markets is 'what goes up must go down', we can use oscillators to see the magnitude of the net 'upness' versus the magnitude of the net 'downness' in a given time frame, and anticipate corrections based on their proportions.

-===-

*1-month 6-hour scale*



-===-

if the two oscillators are legible to you, the red splotches indicate periods of 'overbuying', where the net upness was high for a long period of time. notice how we have spent a lot of time in the overbought region in the mid- and long-term (mid-term circled in green, long-term not shown), and just left the overbought zone in the William's oscillator in the short-term (circled in blue).

further, we can interpret the current downward trending of both oscillators as a downward trend in 'price momentum', which both anticipated the sell-offs we just witnessed, as well as suggests that the market may be preparing for a major correction in the immediate future.

hope that was clear enough -- are you familiar with these indicators at all?

--arepo
579  Other / Off-topic / Re: $1 Trillion Bitcoin on: May 01, 2013, 11:13:58 AM
Quote from: arepo
i'm sorry that you don't know high school physics. i'm not going to be pedantic and type out the basic definition of these quantities if you're not going to do the legwork to inform yourself.
Appeals to authority? All I asked for are definitions. Should be really, really simple.

how the hell is this an appeal to authority? i supplied you with the definitions, which you had to have intentionally removed from that quote... or do you not know how hyperlinks work, either? i simply asked you to do some legwork to inform yourself a little about the field you're commenting about before passing such judgments. i don't think that's unfair in the least.

i'm sorry for my impatience but holding a BS in physics, it causes a little personal offence when my entire field is written off as nonsense.

again, sorry for OT, but i can't let this go.
580  Economy / Speculation / Re: Wall Observer - MtGoxUSD wall movement tracker - Hardcore on: May 01, 2013, 10:52:34 AM
I see single digits as a very real possibility in the next few months, although bottoming between $10 and $30 is more likely.

far too much demand, at this point... deflation is kicking in.

Pages: « 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 [29] 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 ... 81 »
Sponsored by , a Bitcoin-accepting VPN.
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!