Globb0
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 2716
Merit: 2053
Free spirit
|
 |
April 09, 2018, 11:34:31 AM |
|
Buy one, get four more free  Oh that is a shame, they finally have something in stock but its dud
|
|
|
|
|
Jacques_Bittard
Member

Offline
Activity: 154
Merit: 10
.
|
 |
April 09, 2018, 11:34:58 AM |
|
Took about 10h longer then I thought, but rest is on the mark. Everyone who didn't sell on the weekend pump, are greedy little pigs and they get what they deserve. Market movement was quite interesting though. Lowering volume, thin books, strong gravity for sideways. Maybe we are lucky and will see a truly deep drop this week.
|
|
|
|
|
TERA2
Full Member
 
Offline
Activity: 266
Merit: 222
Deb Rah Von Doom
|
 |
April 09, 2018, 11:40:24 AM |
|
I did a search for 'Carolina Train' and found mostly images of train wrecks.
|
|
|
|
|
tonyq
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 879
Merit: 1001
|
 |
April 09, 2018, 11:41:11 AM |
|
Why do so many here fail to see the significance of this chart?  
|
|
|
|
|
kurious
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 2618
Merit: 1749
|
 |
April 09, 2018, 11:44:58 AM Merited by JayJuanGee (1) |
|
The authors don't detail much experimental evidence about their new taint model (basically FIFO accounting for taint), but they do offer a couple of numbers which, if supported by more testing, would be quite impressive. At any rate, there's ample food for thought. If the legislative landscape they hint at really comes into being, I don't know where I'd stand on the line between "hard" and "soft" approaches. Bitcoin enthusiasts? Investors? Law enforcement? All of these positions would entail both "good" and "bad" practical consequences from my self-interested point of view. Nice piece of work. Computer scientists discussing legal implications with a practical, technically sound background. A rarity. Tasty find merited. And where do you short, if you don't mind - if you don't want to say, it's fine. I am wondering about trying the same. I'm pretty much all in, so cannot easily buy any more drops. Insurance might keep me amused (or at least feeling less 'passive'). I just wondered, Finex or..?
|
|
|
|
|
realr0ach
Sr. Member
  
Offline
Activity: 924
Merit: 311
#TheGoyimKnow
|
 |
April 09, 2018, 11:48:03 AM |
|
Why are you not intelligent enough to know the significance of what you posted? The caption on your picture claims they took control of the market right when the CME opened their doors and then crashed it into the ground. BZZZT WRONG ANSWER. They did not magically gain control of the market when the CME that nobody even trades on opened. They already controlled the market beforehand and were the ones who pumped it then dumped it in the first place. They were on both sides of the trade. While you were typing "bitcoin is the new internets of money!!111", they were typing "wow, these guys are fucking delusional idiots - the perfect targets to fleece". Or perhaps you forgot people like (((Goldman Sachs))) were the main owners of things like the Ethereum IPO.
|
|
|
|
|
tonyq
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 879
Merit: 1001
|
 |
April 09, 2018, 11:55:30 AM |
|
Why are you not intelligent enough to know the significance of what you posted? The caption on your picture claims they took control of the market right when the CME opened their doors and then crashed it into the ground. BZZZT WRONG ANSWER. They did not magically gain control of the market when the CME that nobody even trades on opened. They already controlled the market beforehand and were the ones who pumped it then dumped it in the first place. They were on both sides of the trade. While you were typing "bitcoin is the new internets of money!!111", they were typing "wow, these guys are fucking delusional idiots - the perfect targets to fleece". Next you'll be telling me the gold and silver prices are not manipulated. 
|
|
|
|
|
HairyMaclairy
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1442
Merit: 2285
Degenerate bull hatter & Bitcoin monotheist
|
 |
April 09, 2018, 11:58:07 AM |
|
Why do so many here fail to see the significance of this chart?   It’s no coincidence but there was no conspiracy if that is what you are implying. The public all knew about futures and thought Wall Street investment would long Bitcoin while they built up their positions. The hype was insane. It’s a classic buy the runout sell the news.
|
|
|
|
|
podyx
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 2338
Merit: 1035
|
 |
April 09, 2018, 11:58:44 AM |
|
Any reason for the dump?
|
|
|
|
|
fragout
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1280
Merit: 1020
|
 |
April 09, 2018, 11:59:01 AM |
|
Revised date. 02/08/2018
2nd Aug 2018
|
|
|
|
|
HairyMaclairy
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1442
Merit: 2285
Degenerate bull hatter & Bitcoin monotheist
|
 |
April 09, 2018, 11:59:27 AM |
|
Dump because hit the bottom of the downtrend line (log scale).
|
|
|
|
|
Colonel Panic
Member

Offline
Activity: 110
Merit: 26
I do not have a Telegram or Skype account.
|
 |
April 09, 2018, 11:59:41 AM |
|
The authors don't detail much experimental evidence about their new taint model (basically FIFO accounting for taint), but they do offer a couple of numbers which, if supported by more testing, would be quite impressive. At any rate, there's ample food for thought. If the legislative landscape they hint at really comes into being, I don't know where I'd stand on the line between "hard" and "soft" approaches. Bitcoin enthusiasts? Investors? Law enforcement? All of these positions would entail both "good" and "bad" practical consequences from my self-interested point of view. Nice piece of work. Computer scientists discussing legal implications with a practical, technically sound background. A rarity. Tasty find merited. One of the problems with such a 'taint' system that it doesn't address, is what of coins falsely declared stolen? In the paper they seem to assume all such declarations to be honest, but in practice it just moves the arguments to the lawyer-enriching 'how to get these coins declared stolen or not' level.
|
|
|
|
|
realr0ach
Sr. Member
  
Offline
Activity: 924
Merit: 311
#TheGoyimKnow
|
 |
April 09, 2018, 12:08:43 PM |
|
Why are you not intelligent enough to know the significance of what you posted? The caption on your picture claims they took control of the market right when the CME opened their doors and then crashed it into the ground. BZZZT WRONG ANSWER. They did not magically gain control of the market when the CME that nobody even trades on opened. They already controlled the market beforehand and were the ones who pumped it then dumped it in the first place. They were on both sides of the trade. While you were typing "bitcoin is the new internets of money!!111", they were typing "wow, these guys are fucking delusional idiots - the perfect targets to fleece". Next you'll be telling me the gold and silver prices are not manipulated.  Everything is manipulated by the (((money changers))). They have a partnership amongst their roundtable groups like the CFR filled with Hebrew usurers and corporate CEOs to permanently rig markets and make it so they cannot lose. This is the real reason why the insanely rich keep getting more insanely rich recently, otherwise they would make a bad choice and eventually wipe themselves out. This is why people like Hillary Clinton impossibly turn $1000 into $100,000 trading pork futures in one day. However, the markets are predictable to the extent that these movements all require accumulation periods, so any market you look at at any given time is in one of three stages: blowoff top, crashing, or sitting at the trough in accumulation mode.
|
|
|
|
|
kurious
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 2618
Merit: 1749
|
 |
April 09, 2018, 12:12:10 PM |
|
Why do so many here fail to see the significance of this chart?   The chart of the historic downturn in prices is significant and 'many' here have indeed been through every day of it. Many, however, will not agree with why the near-exponential rise of Bitcoin in 2017 ended and reversed. Perhaps because correlation is not always evidence of causation.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
cofefeGandalf
Member

Offline
Activity: 96
Merit: 14
|
 |
April 09, 2018, 12:28:58 PM |
|
Dummass enterprise, that's the wrong direction!
|
|
|
|
|
d_eddie
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 3206
Merit: 5400
|
 |
April 09, 2018, 12:30:54 PM |
|
The authors don't detail much experimental evidence about their new taint model (basically FIFO accounting for taint), but they do offer a couple of numbers which, if supported by more testing, would be quite impressive. At any rate, there's ample food for thought. If the legislative landscape they hint at really comes into being, I don't know where I'd stand on the line between "hard" and "soft" approaches. Bitcoin enthusiasts? Investors? Law enforcement? All of these positions would entail both "good" and "bad" practical consequences from my self-interested point of view. Nice piece of work. Computer scientists discussing legal implications with a practical, technically sound background. A rarity. Tasty find merited. One of the problems with such a 'taint' system that it doesn't address, is what of coins falsely declared stolen? In the paper they seem to assume all such declarations to be honest, but in practice it just moves the arguments to the lawyer-enriching 'how to get these coins declared stolen or not' level. Hm, I hadn't thought of that. Can you name a scenario where the game of falsely reporting a crime ("someone stole my coins!") has a positive probabilistic sum? Penalties can be harsh, and partners in crime won't be happy to see their newly tainted coins decrease in value.
|
|
|
|
|
realr0ach
Sr. Member
  
Offline
Activity: 924
Merit: 311
#TheGoyimKnow
|
 |
April 09, 2018, 12:35:11 PM |
|
|
|
|
|
|
B1tUnl0ck3r
Sr. Member
  
Offline
Activity: 854
Merit: 277
liife threw a tempest at you? be a coconut !
|
 |
April 09, 2018, 12:52:35 PM |
|
I have found a way to get lambos (s, for more than one) but it's quite disgusting... do you wanna know more?
|
|
|
|
|
|
RayX12
|
 |
April 09, 2018, 12:53:00 PM |
|
Why Why Why ... so much manipulation?  
|
|
|
|
|
|