I would give 62/38 that it will go up. Yeah, that is pretty strong..
What does 62/38 mean? odds OK, I'll be more explicit. Why put 62/38 as odds? It seems very specific, considering margin for estimation and error, where something like 6/4 might make more sense to me. |
|
|
|
I would give 62/38 that it will go up. Yeah, that is pretty strong..
What does 62/38 mean? |
|
|
|
What the hell? Did I miss something?  just more millionaires who want out of bitcoin. Only way to do so is buy on gox, lolol. stupid whales. we are crashing to single digits once fiat dries up. sidenote: lol @ pathetic depth on bitstamp. This is the competition to Gox? lolol. It's sole purpose is clearly to cash out. not good sign of a healthy competitor. ... to get out you've got to sell somewhere else. Where are the dumps? Other exchanges are following not diverging. During whale-less days, BitStamp is seeing steady or slowly rising prices with > volume than Gox. If whales are selling slowly, we'd be seeing these exchanges fall. Bid depth too small, so whales wouldn't sell ANYTHING? That's silly... Volume is low during downtrends, higher during uptrends. Keep beating your drum, you might be able to buy your 5 coins back soon :-) the poor whales CANT sell on alt-exchanges because they have no depth and would cause massive slippage. Whales would eat huge losses. Instead they cling to bitcoin hoping price keeps going up as other desperate whales buy on gox, eventually there might be enough depth on bitstamp so that loss is minimal (few percent). I think it is wishful thinking. Fiat dries up, we rocket upward, then crash to unbelievable new lows. Single digits my friends. Whales can exit through Tradehill.com oh, wait a minute, tradehill is temporarily suspended. ergo tradehill whales hit gox |
|
|
|
More indications against the 'return to the mean' is that not a single chart will draw a line corresponding with the pre-bubble growth to the current $100, they all point to somewhere around $50.
This one (top) doesn't support the 'return to mean' theory:  Even if the 'correction/deflation' goes a fair bit below the line, I still don't see it going as far as $50, unless adoption is reaching saturation, which I doubt |
|
|
|
this 'head and shoulders' you are debating about seems allot like the 'head and shoulders' a few people identified a couple of weeks ago with a similar upwards slant:  |
|
|
|
It was 'low volume' until these big buys started increasing in frequency. Now it seems that small fish are still low volume, resulting in sideways action awaiting the big buys.
I wasn't around pre-'bubble' and am curious about volume comparison. Before the bubble hype got too silly, was it like this, or were the little fishies more active than we're seeing now?
The little fishes will accelerate the rally if the buys keep up much longer. We are close to wave 3 of 3 off the recent $65 bottom. In the middle of such a wave comes the so called "point of recognition". If we don't see such an acceleration then Blitz will be gloating again. So there was more volume activity across the full spectrum of transaction sizes before the bubble ramp-up got out of hand? It looks like small fish volume acceleration has begun since the last 7 hours and is being tested. Testers best not blow that candle out before it spreads! |
|
|
|
|
It was 'low volume' until these big buys started increasing in frequency. Now it seems that small fish are still low volume, resulting in sideways action awaiting the big buys.
I wasn't around pre-'bubble' and am curious about volume comparison. Before the bubble hype got too silly, was it like this, or were the little fishies more active than we're seeing now?
|
|
|
|
Are they taking us to support to just drop us off or go higher? I don't know, I guess either is possible. But big money would probably not be smart to do the former.
I would have thought that their aim would be to get us more than just past that support, convincing enough people to take over the buying from them. Then they could wait to dump much higher once the enthused smaller buyers are exhausted. big players aren't buying bitcoin to later dump higher.... big players are making a small investment that they will ride to the end of time, maybe they will have some fun buying low selling high, but their primary strategy is to make a risky bet that can pay off big in 10 years or not at all. at least this is the only thing that makes any sense to me, this is my strategy as well, but i'm not a big player, far from it.... I also like the long-termist strategy best (although I'm fairly conservative about where the asymptote maximum price will be), but I fear that there is likely enough big-player incentive to want to make a bull-trap profit, dumping hard, then reloading on cheaper coins again, especially if it's perceived by many to be a legitimate bear market. It might even make sense to ride it for all it's worth until a very convincing bottom has been reached, in order for the subsequent bull market to be all the more successful in the long run. For example, such a bull market would be less likely to suffer further drops once the bitcoin economy is more established. I'm pretty new to all though though, but this seems to ring true to me atm If you're right, and there are more than just a handful of big investors, what I've said might at least be a contingency. |
|
|
|
Are they taking us to support to just drop us off or go higher? I don't know, I guess either is possible. But big money would probably not be smart to do the former.
I would have thought that their aim would be to get us more than just past that support, convincing enough people to take over the buying from them. Then they could wait to dump much higher once the enthused smaller buyers are exhausted. |
|
|
|
@micalith : I replied to you on IRC few days ago, "<BTCOxygen> You have a invalid addess in place, Please enter a valid address and let me know.", You saw you quit IRC after that.
I looked through the logs and still you have the same Invalid address.
Your reply didn't show within the several hours I kept the IRC window open. When I closed it, there was still no response, just the empty 'Hi', which wound me up. I had previously checked the address, but in deed, the last digit was missing when I checked it yesterday after seeing your response here, so I fixed the address and prepared myself for severe embarrassment. Now today I've checked my wallet and btcoxygen and it still hasn't paid. edit: 1st of August, finally paid. |
|
|
|
Feels like big dumpers are consenting to wait to see if we can reach the necessary momentum for them to dump at sustainable prices.
LOL, there's no momentum at all right now. I wouldn't have the patience to wait till bloody Christmas. Dude, I've been waiting for 2.5 years now for my gold parity. Still not even close. I expect to have to wait at least another 1.5 years. Depends what you're waiting for. There will be at least a big miner or SR dealer or two wanting their fiat for life things much sooner than all that. I'm just apprehensive at not having seen a really big dump yet despite the bid side being ripe for a harvest I think you should fundamentally rethink your views and timeframes. The fact that you joined this forum 3 days before the crash speaks volumes. Volumes eh. I was very lucky that my wire transfers didn't get through until after the crash! Anyway, my limited experience here has led me to expect fairly big dumps fairly frequently providing that the bid side gets steep and price isn't going choo choo. Other than manipulators, I figured that there might be some of the bigger BTC earners out there preferring fiat for now rather than speculating in this post-bubble and probable/debatable bear market. Do you reckon I'm wrong to expect a big dump any day? |
|
|
|
Feels like big dumpers are consenting to wait to see if we can reach the necessary momentum for them to dump at sustainable prices.
LOL, there's no momentum at all right now. I wouldn't have the patience to wait till bloody Christmas. Dude, I've been waiting for 2.5 years now for my gold parity. Still not even close. I expect to have to wait at least another 1.5 years. Depends what you're waiting for. There will be at least a big miner or SR dealer or two wanting their fiat for life things much sooner than all that. I'm just apprehensive at not having seen a really big dump yet despite the bid side being ripe for a harvest |
|
|
|
Feels like big dumpers are consenting to wait to see if we can reach the necessary momentum for them to dump at sustainable prices.
LOL, there's no momentum at all right now. I wouldn't have the patience to wait till bloody Christmas. |
|
|
|
|
Feels like big dumpers are consenting to wait to see if we can reach the necessary momentum for them to dump at sustainable prices.
|
|
|
|
This is also affected by increases in our Hashrate. If our hashrate goes up your return will go down. But, it should be offset by increasing the number of blocks we find. You really can't tell much looking at each individual block, your graph 7 day average is a better indicater.
OK, so you're saying it was a coincidence that this hashrate increase, at the apex of my going from >expected to <expected happened while my miners were having a nap. I wonder what the odds are. How does the hashrate relate to the shares per block being different? I can't see how that works. If the pool hash rate stays the same while the network hash rate increases, the pool's chance of finding a block decreases, i.e., it will take longer on average for the pool to find a block. Similarly, if the pool hash rate is increasing while the network hash rate stays the same, the pool's chance of finding a block increases, resulting in shorter round times. Now, if your hash rate stays the same while the pool's hash rate increases, your share of the pot decreases because your payout is based in part on your_shares_submitted_during_round divided by pool_shares_submitted_during_round. Your lower payout will be offset a bit if the pool has an increasing hash rate because the pool will find on average, more blocks. I understand that your_shares_submitted_during_round / pool_shares_submitted_during_round is what is affected by respective varying hashrates. As such, an increase in the pool's total hashrate explains why I would get a smaller proportion of the total shares for a block. I know that here is added variance to do with how close your last share in the block is to the end of the block, which would explain why the shares proportion doesn't translate perfectly to my earnt BTC as with a proportional earning pool. What I didn't get was why my earnings might have been more than expected more often than less than expected, until I stopped mining for 8 hours, then started again, with more 'balanced' expected earnings. To be sure, I plotted the numbers for before and after the outage, though not really enough points to confirm anything. I'm guessing that I was just having a lucky run before the outage. If that's right, then there's no long-term penalty for disconnecting other than the current round. Is that right? |
|
|
|
|
I'm starting to get convinced that they've orchestrated a genuine trend reversal. Doing it like this, not allowing capitulation, might serve to reduce volatility. A gradual process on people becoming convinced that it's not going back to 80 again, means re-investment more evenly spread out.
silly idea?
|
|
|
|
Ever since an all-night wifi outage, I'm getting frequently underpaid. When calculating the expected btc before my wifi outage, I was getting consistently more than expected. I guess this is a nice example of how the slush points work.
my btc my expected btc
19289 2013-07-25 14:25:20 3:10:10 65087874 8914 0.00267229 25*8914/ 65087874 = 0.0034
19288 2013-07-25 11:15:10 1:06:44 22496665 3072 0.00314420 25*3072/ 22496665 = 0.0034
19287 2013-07-25 10:08:26 0:05:58 2027467 308 0.00380032 25*308/ 2027467 = 0.0038
19286 2013-07-25 10:02:28 0:01:30 497916 70 0.00342332 25*70 /497916 = 0.0035
19285 2013-07-25 10:00:58 2:29:49 50785547 4448 0.00315257 25*4448/50785547 = 0.0022
(The last one is higher than expected as I switched on my miners half way through that round)
My question is, how long does it take to get back on to better than expected btc? Cheers
This is also affected by increases in our Hashrate. If our hashrate goes up your return will go down. But, it should be offset by increasing the number of blocks we find. You really can't tell much looking at each individual block, your graph 7 day average is a better indicater. OK, so you're saying it was a coincidence that this hashrate increase, at the apex of my going from >expected to <expected happened while my miners were having a nap. I wonder what the odds are. How does the hashrate relate to the shares per block being different? I can't see how that works. |
|
|
|
|
Ever since an all-night wifi outage, I'm getting frequently underpaid. When calculating the expected btc before my wifi outage, I was getting consistently more than expected. I guess this is a nice example of how the slush points work.
my btc my expected btc
19289 2013-07-25 14:25:20 3:10:10 65087874 8914 0.00267229 25*8914/ 65087874 = 0.0034
19288 2013-07-25 11:15:10 1:06:44 22496665 3072 0.00314420 25*3072/ 22496665 = 0.0034
19287 2013-07-25 10:08:26 0:05:58 2027467 308 0.00380032 25*308/ 2027467 = 0.0038
19286 2013-07-25 10:02:28 0:01:30 497916 70 0.00342332 25*70 /497916 = 0.0035
19285 2013-07-25 10:00:58 2:29:49 50785547 4448 0.00315257 25*4448/50785547 = 0.0022
(The last one is higher than expected as I switched on my miners half way through that round)
My question is, how long does it take to get back on to better than expected btc? Cheers
|
|
|
|
micalith, please refer to my post #321 in this thread.
Yes, that's reasonable. What's really eating me is that I've still not been paid after nearly 2 weeks. It's only a fraction of a bitcoin, but I'm extra furious because I'm convinced that I've basically been robbed. He's surely scamming, trying to get away with paying just enough people to make it look like incompetence. I'm just not one of those lucky people On the IRC, after failing to fix anything as promised the night before, and failing to give any explanation, he responded to my nagging requests for attention with 'Hi', then never responded to my reply to that for the rest of the day. Piss taker! |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
