Wall Observer BTC/USD - Bitcoin price movement tracking & discussion

[Adrian-x]

Do you happen to like it in the academia when somebody who has no experience on the subject that you have been researching for months, uses childish non-real world examples to prove that in some cases the model you have been researching and using with incredible precision, would give strange results?

Sorry, we teachers develop a bad habit of simplifying 40 years of experience with a tool into childish examples.

What would your incredibly precise model say about this real-world (in more than one sense!) example:



What difference do you see between Apr/1997 and Jan/2000 in this example?

Mmm now the kicker Bitcoin isn't worldcom our growth economy is worldcom, bitcoin is technology and some justify its existence by relating it to an investment. 

[uhoh]

Do you happen to like it in the academia when somebody who has no experience on the subject that you have been researching for months, uses childish non-real world examples to prove that in some cases the model you have been researching and using with incredible precision, would give strange results?

Sorry, we teachers develop a bad habit of simplifying 40 years of experience with a tool into childish examples.

What would your incredibly precise model say about this real-world (in more than one sense!) example:



What difference do you see between Apr/1997 and Jan/2000 in this example?

I know the difference. Dodgy insider dealings and bankruptcy? It's not a real-world comparison.

[igorr]

Do you happen to like it in the academia when somebody who has no experience on the subject that you have been researching for months, uses childish non-real world examples to prove that in some cases the model you have been researching and using with incredible precision, would give strange results?

Sorry, we teachers develop a bad habit of simplifying 40 years of experience with a tool into childish examples.

What would your incredibly precise model say about this real-world (in more than one sense!) example:



What difference do you see between Apr/1997 and Jan/2000 in this example?

Mmm now the kicker Bitcoin isn't worldcom our growth economy is worldcom, bitcoin is technology and some justify its existence by relating it to an investment. 

bitcoin is not technology, bitcoin is a means to getting rich mining companies

[JorgeStolfi]

Yes. Technical analysis, sentiment analysis and, to a certain extent, fundamental analysis all work with Bitcoin. Here is a good one, with real fundamentals: https://medium.com/p/ba5f3fcce103

Thanks for the article.

Even though it is supposed to be a "bearish" article, I think that it is too optimistic already when it implicitly identifies "crypto-currency" with "bitcoin".   Consider this hypothetical statement that one might have made 20 years ago:

The World Wide Web is here to stay.  As more people choose to use it to publish text and data, more people will have to use it in order to get the information they need.  Surely, there will be a time in the not-so-distant future when perhaps 500 million people will use the Web regularly, and perhaps 10% of them will find it essential for their business or work.  Therefore, we can conservatively predict that a Netscape browser license will sell for 10'000 dollars or more by then.

[adamstgBit]

such bearishness

[Richy_T]

I suppose that, in the early days, sites like exchanges and online casinos would have a single bitcoin address for bitcoin deposits, and all clients would transfer bitcoins to it (using the decimal satoshi amount to identify their deposits); whereas now such sites commonly generate a new unique address for each client and/or each deposit.  Is this correct?

The new addresses is the way it was always supposed to be done but it is a bit of a hassle to set up for many.

[boumalo]

I cant imagine the butthurt from the people who bought all along the way down and are still holding  

If you bought every week from 1000$ to 450$ today, your average cost per bitcoin should be around 640$ so you are down 30% and you need a 40% increase in price to be even

Your average cost is going down right now

If you bought at the dips, but lets think of the bulls (the ones who cry CCMF, with every bull-trap) who buy when there is somewhat of a price increase, your average cost per bitcoin would be around 800$

I fit the buying all the way down scenario fairly well.  I began buying at about $1,200 b/c I got my first 1.24 BTC through Localbitcoins.com in the end of November 2013.

Mostly, ever since, I have been buying on the way down - even though i missed a few buying opportunities here and there to buy more when the price was lower and to refrain from buying when the price was higher.

Today my average buy-in price (including fees) is a little less than $605.  I am on the edge of buying a little bit more - yet I am thinking we may get down to $420, the way this seems to be going.... not sure when to pull the trigger on the next buy, exactly.

If I panic sold today, I would be about 28% down (including fees).

not a good idea...

You are saying it is not a good idea to buy while it goes down or to sell now?

Yes. Technical analysis, sentiment analysis and, to a certain extent, fundamental analysis all work with Bitcoin. Here is a good one, with real fundamentals: https://medium.com/p/ba5f3fcce103

Thanks for the article.

Even though it is supposed to be a "bearish" article, I think that it is too optimistic already when it implicitly identifies "crypto-currency" with "bitcoin".   Consider this hypothetical statement that one might have made 20 years ago:

The World Wide Web is here to stay.  As more people choose to use it to publish text and data, more people will have to use it in order to get the information they need.  Surely, there will be a time in the not-so-distant future when perhaps 500 million people will use the Web regularly, and perhaps 10% of them will find it essential for their business or work.  Therefore, we can conservatively predict that a Netscape browser license will sell for 10'000 dollars or more by then.

Of course an asset going up can disappear and we see new bubbles all the time and they always end up popping

[ChartBuddy]

Explanation

[slapper]

Yes. Technical analysis, sentiment analysis and, to a certain extent, fundamental analysis all work with Bitcoin. Here is a good one, with real fundamentals: https://medium.com/p/ba5f3fcce103

Thanks for the article.

Even though it is supposed to be a "bearish" article, I think that it is too optimistic already when it implicitly identifies "crypto-currency" with "bitcoin".   Consider this hypothetical statement that one might have made 20 years ago:

The World Wide Web is here to stay.  As more people choose to use it to publish text and data, more people will have to use it in order to get the information they need.  Surely, there will be a time in the not-so-distant future when perhaps 500 million people will use the Web regularly, and perhaps 10% of them will find it essential for their business or work.  Therefore, we can conservatively predict that a Netscape browser license will sell for 10'000 dollars or more by then.

Well the cost for the early Netscape adopter is only a few cents. Then they can resell it to others for $1000 each and ask the new buyers to resell it for $10000 down the road. If you don't like Netscape then you are anti-Internet.

[igorr]

Bitcoin or Dumpcoin

[Richy_T]

Maybe I should remove my 425 bids

Should I?

Why did you have them there if you weren't hoping for the price to go there?

[adamstgBit]

this must best the longest bear market in bitcoin history.

[adamstgBit]

Maybe I should remove my 425 bids

Should I?

Why did you have them there if you weren't hoping for the price to go there?

425 is an awesome bid.

[spooderman]

Maybe I should remove my 425 bids

Should I?

Why did you have them there if you weren't hoping for the price to go there?

[igorr]

this must best the longest bear market in bitcoin history.

Not bear market, this is the end.

[Peter R]

What would your incredibly precise model say about this real-world (in more than one sense!) example:

My model would say that for this to happen, that bitcoin adoption would need to reverse course.  That is, bitcoin would have to become less useful such that it is used less and less moving forward in time rather than used more and more.

No one can predict the future with certainty, but it seems to me that bitcoin's properties make it a very useful tool for a wide variety of purposes.  Here is a thought experiment: imagine that tomorrow everybody somehow "knows" that the price of bitcoin would never increase, but that the price of bitcoin would never decrease either.  It is simply a fact that 1 BTC will forever buy the same basket of goods.  Would you expect world-wide demand to hold bitcoin to increase or decrease?

[JorgeStolfi]

This is how we make progress in theoretical physics.  A good example is Newton's Second Law: f = m a.  A lot people think that this is some discovery about a "fundamental law of the universe," but it is actually just a definition.  The net force acting on an object is defined by humans to be equal to the product of the object's mass and acceleration.  You could equally create another "law" that says f2 = m v, where v is velocity and f2 is "force 2.0."  Both are correct by definition, but only one is useful.  If you calculate the "force 2.0" of gravity, you'll get a complex mess; whereas the "force" of gravity is an elegant equation.

Well, I would take issue with that. Sure, mathematically one can choose any set of consistent concepts and true statementes as the starting point, and treat the remainder as derived.

However, that is not how f = ma developed historically.  Acceleration of course is defined as the second derivative of position with respect to time, and Galileo, before Newton, was one who contributed to the understanding of uniformly accelerated motion.  Force however can be "felt" and measured independently of any motion (e.g. with a dynamometer), and well before f = ma there was allready a large consistent quantitative theory of forces without motion, that included weight ("two identical objects have twice the weight of one"), levers, pulleys, and inclined planes, buoyancy and more.   So when Newton stated f = ma, he indeed discovered a law of nature.

[wachtwoord]

Maybe I should remove my 425 bids

Should I?

Why did you have them there if you weren't hoping for the price to go there?

Hahaha he only wants to buy flash crashes it seems.

[Richy_T]

this must best the longest bear market in bitcoin history.

It will be something to tell your grandchildren about when you want them to stop being ungrateful shits.

[rpietila]

 Here is a thought experiment: imagine that tomorrow everybody somehow "knows" that the price of bitcoin would never increase, but that the price of bitcoin would never decrease either.  It is simply a fact that 1 BTC will forever buy the same basket of goods.  Would you expect world-wide demand to hold bitcoin to increase or decrease?

Increase, by a large multiple!

Bitcoin is more useful than fiat currency, and as its value would forever be stable against goods (like gold's value is, even though gold cannot be transacted), there would be no risk in holding bitcoins. I would imagine that perhaps 10,000x today's number of bitcoin would be demanded by the market.