JorgeStolfi
|
|
April 24, 2014, 03:07:14 PM |
|
Don't look at me, obviously that is not mine: * My plots are nicer. * My private Technical Analysis method gives 0 USD/BTC by July 27th, 2014 19:23:15 UTC. (Hey, it is still better than that of those Technical Analists on TV who predicted negative price!)
|
|
|
|
ElectricMucus
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1666
Merit: 1057
Marketing manager - GO MP
|
|
April 24, 2014, 03:07:16 PM |
|
Note that the percent changes (not increases) from year to year were 2011 -> 2012 300% 2012 -> 2013 3024% 2013 -> 2015 314%
Neither constant, not uniformly increasing. What will be the percent change 2014 -> 2015? The simplest formula that will fit the three data points above is a parabola. Working in log scale, this is what I get: http://www.ic.unicamp.br/~stolfi/temp/2014-04-24-april-prices-extrap.pngHorrible chart, because you ignored valid data. You can't just ignore previous years. JorgeStolfi is truely a master of his craft. e: Horrible !
|
|
|
|
JorgeStolfi
|
|
April 24, 2014, 03:12:34 PM |
|
Note that the percent changes (not increases) from year to year were 2011 -> 2012 300% 2012 -> 2013 3024% 2013 -> 2015 314%
Neither constant, not uniformly increasing. What will be the percent change 2014 -> 2015? The simplest formula that will fit the three data points above is a parabola. Working in log scale, this is what I get: http://www.ic.unicamp.br/~stolfi/temp/2014-04-24-april-prices-extrap.pngHorrible chart, because you ignored valid data. You can't just ignore previous years. I just used the data that the quoted post used. What were the percentage changes 2009 -> 2010, 2010 -> 2011?
|
|
|
|
Bronstad
Member
Offline
Activity: 92
Merit: 10
|
|
April 24, 2014, 03:13:29 PM |
|
Note that the percent changes (not increases) from year to year were 2011 -> 2012 300% 2012 -> 2013 3024% 2013 -> 2015 314%
Neither constant, not uniformly increasing. What will be the percent change 2014 -> 2015? The simplest formula that will fit the three data points above is a parabola. ... A even more simple formula would be to average the numbers -> +1212% (1 BTC = $5820) Or you could take the median -> +314% (1 BTC = $1522.90)
|
|
|
|
Bronstad
Member
Offline
Activity: 92
Merit: 10
|
|
April 24, 2014, 03:16:08 PM |
|
Note that the percent changes (not increases) from year to year were 2011 -> 2012 300% 2012 -> 2013 3024% 2013 -> 2015 314%
Neither constant, not uniformly increasing. What will be the percent change 2014 -> 2015? The simplest formula that will fit the three data points above is a parabola. Working in log scale, this is what I get: http://www.ic.unicamp.br/~stolfi/temp/2014-04-24-april-prices-extrap.pngHorrible chart, because you ignored valid data. You can't just ignore previous years. I just used the data that the quoted post used. What were the percentage changes 2009 -> 2010, 2010 -> 2011? According to research by rpietila ( https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=322058.0), it was roughly 1 BTC = $0.005 in 2009 and 2010. 2009 -> 2010 + 0% 2010 -> 2011 + 34000%
|
|
|
|
Erdogan
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1512
Merit: 1005
|
|
April 24, 2014, 03:20:08 PM |
|
... It's a high-risk low-reward investment
[..]
If you understand it, it is low risk high reward. If you still read the main stream media, you see that understanding is not easy. It takes some work and some brains.
|
|
|
|
dreamspark
|
|
April 24, 2014, 03:21:44 PM |
|
Wanna be smart arse TA-er... ZZZ the guy hadn't even read the white paper.
|
|
|
|
JorgeStolfi
|
|
April 24, 2014, 03:24:23 PM |
|
He writes that "0.005 USD" is just an arbitrary value. It seems that there is no data for 2009 -> 2010, and perhaps 300 to 400% 30000 to 40000% for 2010 -> 2011. I could try to fit a cubic polynomial to those 4 data points, but you would hate the result even more.
|
|
|
|
rpietila
Donator
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1722
Merit: 1036
|
|
April 24, 2014, 03:30:29 PM |
|
He writes that "0.005 USD" is just an arbitrary value. That would be oversimplifying my words. Try: "I have learned of several isolated trades during the time period, none of which has happened at below 0.001 or above 0.01. Because the trading was non-continuous and the individual circumstances may have affected the prices, volume data is not available to me, and many other factors, I have approximated 0.005 for the whole period with no trend."
|
|
|
|
dreamspark
|
|
April 24, 2014, 03:33:19 PM |
|
He writes that "0.005 USD" is just an arbitrary value. It seems that there is no data for 2009 -> 2010, and perhaps 300 to 400% 30000 to 40000% for 2010 -> 2011. I could try to fit a cubic polynomial to those 4 data points, but you would hate the result even more. I can find you some threads that demonstrate that was the approximate exchange rate during that period.
|
|
|
|
JorgeStolfi
|
|
April 24, 2014, 03:33:22 PM |
|
That would be oversimplifying my words.
Indeed, sorry.
|
|
|
|
adamstgBit
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1904
Merit: 1037
Trusted Bitcoiner
|
|
April 24, 2014, 03:39:55 PM |
|
Wanna be smart arse TA-er... ZZZ the guy hadn't even read the white paper. bitcoin is being accepted by some major retailers, governments are making laws about it, new biz in dev. this must mean bitcoin is going to 0. this TA is beyond retarded.
|
|
|
|
JorgeStolfi
|
|
April 24, 2014, 03:40:32 PM |
|
I can find you some threads that demonstrate that was the approximate exchange rate during that period.
Hey, my goal was just to make some salutary fun of price extrapolations. Frankly, I have no idea what the price will be next year. AFAIK, the only model that has some claim to statistical legitimacy is the log-Brownian (or geometric-Brownian) model, which gives a very broad probability distribution, having 50% chance above today's price, 50% below, for any future date.
|
|
|
|
JorgeStolfi
|
|
April 24, 2014, 03:44:24 PM |
|
bitcoin is being accepted by some major retailers, governments are making laws about it, new biz in dev. this must mean bitcoin is going to 0.
this TA is beyond retarded.
Those are "fundamentals". Technical Analysis assumes that all the trends of the fundamentals and their influence on price are "encoded" in the price history, so there is no need consider them explictly.
|
|
|
|
rpietila
Donator
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1722
Merit: 1036
|
|
April 24, 2014, 03:45:10 PM |
|
AFAIK, the only model that has some claim to statistical legitimacy is the log-Brownian (or geometric-Brownian) model, which gives a very broad probability distribution, having 50% chance above today's price, 50% below, for any future date.
Bitcoin 30-day change (historical, 1500+ datapoints) is 60.6% positive, 39.4% negative.
|
|
|
|
Bronstad
Member
Offline
Activity: 92
Merit: 10
|
|
April 24, 2014, 03:48:37 PM |
|
I can find you some threads that demonstrate that was the approximate exchange rate during that period.
Hey, my goal was just to make some salutary fun of price extrapolations. Nah, your goal is to try and squash any positive sentiment in this thread.
|
|
|
|
adamstgBit
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1904
Merit: 1037
Trusted Bitcoiner
|
|
April 24, 2014, 03:51:46 PM |
|
bitcoin is being accepted by some major retailers, governments are making laws about it, new biz in dev. this must mean bitcoin is going to 0.
this TA is beyond retarded.
Those are "fundamentals". Technical Analysis assumes that all the trends of the fundamentals and their influence on price are "encoded" in the price history, so there is no need consider them explictly. do the "fundamentals" allow a price of <400? not for more than a few hours
|
|
|
|
romneymoney
Full Member
Offline
Activity: 193
Merit: 117
HODL
|
|
April 24, 2014, 03:54:45 PM |
|
Wanna be smart arse TA-er... The smiley face, the grammatical errors, the overconfidence. "sorry bitcoiners" Why would they set a troll to moderator? I'd like to hear how this guy committed his fortune to futures of BTC at under $50 in 2015 It's easy to draw trendlines to anywhere without any skin in the game.
|
|
|
|
JorgeStolfi
|
|
April 24, 2014, 03:56:37 PM |
|
Hey, my goal was just to make some salutary fun of price extrapolations.
Nah, your goal is to try and squash any positive sentiment in this thread. Salesmen want optimistic estimates; traders should want realistic ones. (But I am not claiming that mine are realistic.)
|
|
|
|
eiskalt
|
|
April 24, 2014, 03:58:18 PM |
|
jump ship - load the truck - obey the buell!
WROOOMM!
|
|
|
|
|