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

[ZephramC]

If BTCChina is dead then why the volume is quite high (~100BTC/hour) there?

[BTCfan1]

so.....bored.....argh!

[aminorex]

WTH is happening with XC? Can anyone give a FUDless unbiased opinion? -_-

vaporware 

No improvement over CryptoNote

technically, some glitches, nothing too serious.  trying to add anonymity features but not really competitive, due to trusted nodes, so abstractly similar to drk.  

price-wise, competition with cryptonote may be part of the story, some dumping of premined coins seems likely, but mostly just hot money flows fleeing on any weakness - profit taking.  

I own some xmr - sold drk to buy xmr when it first came out as bmr - so consider the bias implications, if any.  If I thought xc had competitive privacy features I would be a buyer at some price below 0.001, but I don't.

[Parazyd]

If BTCChina is dead then why the volume is quite high (~100BTC/hour) there?

Who said they're dead?

[aminorex]

The law is a fail though.

Why?  It seems obvious enough.

[Parazyd]

The law is a fail though.

Why?  It seems obvious enough.

http://spectrum.ieee.org/computing/networks/metcalfes-law-is-wrong

[Raystonn]

The law is a fail though.

Why?  It seems obvious enough.

http://spectrum.ieee.org/computing/networks/metcalfes-law-is-wrong

TL;DR: The paper claims growth is n log(n) and not n^2.

[bpnave]

The law is a fail though.

Why?  It seems obvious enough.

http://spectrum.ieee.org/computing/networks/metcalfes-law-is-wrong

TL;DR: The paper claims growth is n log(n) and not n^2.

Honestly, it would only be n^2 if every node connected with every other node. I'm certainly not friends with EVERYONE who ever is or was on facebook!

[aminorex]

The law is a fail though.

Why?  It seems obvious enough.

http://spectrum.ieee.org/computing/networks/metcalfes-law-is-wrong

TL;DR: The paper claims growth is n log(n) and not n^2.

Okay, the zipf weighting makes sense, but only when you start adding low value nodes, i.e. nodes with lower transaction potential.   As long as your proxy for n is the recently active addresses metcalfe should continue to hold.  Wake me up if the price trend starts to deviate from that.

[aminorex]

The law is a fail though.

Why?  It seems obvious enough.

http://spectrum.ieee.org/computing/networks/metcalfes-law-is-wrong

TL;DR: The paper claims growth is n log(n) and not n^2.

Honestly, it would only be n^2 if every node connected with every other node. I'm certainly not friends with EVERYONE who ever is or was on facebook!

That doesn't matter.  What matters is that metcalfe makes the simplifying assumption that each node has an equal likelihood of transacting with any added node, and those transactions are of uniform value.  Clearly this is not true.  In fact the value in the first half of the adoption curve should be increasing, and in the latter part decreasing.  I would expect value to exceed metcalfe in future, and later to fall below.

As marketcap rises the upper bound on transaction value rises.  As adoption increases the likelihood that a transaction can be made in btc increases. As interest and participation by wealth holders rises the available value to transmit increases.  All this is yet to come for the most part.

As adoption saturates marginal players are added to the network.  Their value-add will tend to zero.  That is several years in the future.

Using recently active addresses tends to compensate for variations in proclivity to transact.  It fails to account for factors affecting the average value of individual transactions.

[Parazyd]

Bitstamp showing movement!

[kryptopojken]

Bitstamp showing movement!

Yes, price is up a whopping $4.5 with no volume at all

[Parazyd]

It's at least something. It's been hibernating the entire morning

[aminorex]

Yes, price is up a whopping $4.5 with no volume at all

Are you counting chinese volume?  No?  Then you are not counting volume. Stamp is just following.

[kryptopojken]

Yes, price is up a whopping $4.5 with no volume at all

Are you counting chinese volume?  No?  Then you are not counting volume. Stamp is just following.

and that makes us bullish or what?

[aminorex]

Yes, price is up a whopping $4.5 with no volume at all

Are you counting chinese volume?  No?  Then you are not counting volume. Stamp is just following.

and that makes us bullish or what?

Doesn't affect me or my monkey.  We were bullish anyhow.

[JorgeStolfi]

If BTCChina is dead then why the volume is quite high (~100BTC/hour) there?

Check the 1d charts for last 6-8 months at bitcoinwisdom.com, compare volumes of BTC-China, Huobi, OKCoin.

* BTC-China was dominant in China through 2013. It had ~13 kBTC/day in October, then ˜60 kBTC/day until ~Dec/20.  After the "five agencies decree" they stopped yuan input/output through banks and switched to a voucher system; which apparently never worked because their volume fell to ˜5 kBTC/day or less.  At some point they got a bank deposits/withdrawals working again, but never recovered their former volume.

* OKCoin started having substantial volume in November, ~40 KBTC/day (2/3 of than BTC-China).  After the December decree they too (IIRC) stopped using banks for a short while, and their volume fell to near zero; but  in January they got bank channels working again.  Their volume recovered to ~20 kBTC/day and then in February rose to ~60 kBTC/day.

* Huobi started real volume in early November, with ~40 kBTC/day.  After the December decree they continued using banks, and their volume then increased to the current ~60 kBTC.  (Presumably they took most of the BTC-China clients.)

Fee policies also contributed to the picture -- Huobi did not charge fees, OKCoin eventually abolished theirs, BTC-China resisted for a while.

There were a few short periods when the volumes fell substantially in those Chinese exchanges, e.g. the Chinese New Year's week.

There were several other significant exchanges in China (FXBTC, BTC38, etc.) which may account for 30% of the Chinese exchange volume.  Even without them, the total Chinese volume per day was about 80% of the World total.

In summary, BTC-China became insignificant after the December decrees (maybe 2-3% of the Chinese volume) and never recovered.

[JorgeStofli]

I am offering 5000BTC at a 10% discount for sale via Paypal. PM me if interested, otherwise i will dump them in Bitstamp with a market order in 12 hours.

[aminorex]

I am offering 5000BTC at a 10% discount for sale via Paypal. PM me if interested, otherwise i will dump them in Bitstamp with a market order in 12 hours.

Escrow with JorgeStolfi at 0.5% okay?

[JorgeStofli]

I am offering 5000BTC at a 10% discount for sale via Paypal. PM me if interested, otherwise i will dump them in Bitstamp with a market order in 12 hours.

Escrow with JorgeStolfi at 0.5% okay?

Deal!