rpietila Wall Observer - the Quality TA Thread ;)

[inca]

Have you looked at the current "decentralization" of those who record transactions?  Half a dozen pools record the vast majority of all transactions.  And that assumes those pools aren't owned/controlled by same entities.

Do you understand what pool means?

[1714483908]

1714483908

[1714483908]

1714483908

[1714483908]

1714483908

[1714483908]

1714483908

[1714483908]

1714483908

[AlexGR]

Is anyone using data sets of facebook members on bitcoin & altcoin groups/pages for their (private*) projections? The rationale is that they should depict the network effect and expansion rate in a way which is perhaps more accurate than addresses.

* I haven't seen anything posted publicly, so...

[BitChick]

Would it be considered slow growth if we were to stay within $600-$800 for a couple months, and then burst through ATH and beyond?

You think the next top will be higher then $6000?

Staying in 600-800 for some time is a possibility, but I give a higher probability to a rather short time (<2 months) than a longer one.

Going higher than 6000 is the more likely, the longer it takes for the boom to start.

- I don't pretend having a crystal ball.

You non-existent crystall ball is much better then mine or most anyone else's. 

I also don't pretend having a castle..

So Risto,  in early July you said that going higher than 6000 was more likely the longer it takes for the boom to start.  I guess the good news is that it is indeed taking longer to start!

I would still be totally thrilled to see 6000 on the next rally, and many are pessimistic of course. 

Are you still feeling fairly confident about this?  Any new predictions on what kind of time frame we are looking at?  Your "crystal ball" always seems to work a little better than mine. 

[rpietila]

Would it be considered slow growth if we were to stay within $600-$800 for a couple months, and then burst through ATH and beyond?

You think the next top will be higher then $6000?

Staying in 600-800 for some time is a possibility, but I give a higher probability to a rather short time (<2 months) than a longer one.

Going higher than 6000 is the more likely, the longer it takes for the boom to start.

- I don't pretend having a crystal ball.

You non-existent crystall ball is much better then mine or most anyone else's. 

I also don't pretend having a castle..

So Risto,  in early July you said that going higher than 6000 was more likely the longer it takes for the boom to start.  I guess the good news is that it is indeed taking longer to start!

I would still be totally thrilled to see 6000 on the next rally, and many are pessimistic of course. 

Are you still feeling fairly confident about this?  Any new predictions on what kind of time frame we are looking at?  Your "crystal ball" always seems to work a little better than mine. 

The main way I see cryptocurrency rising (at present) is for Bitcoin to take the lead. Historically the 2011-6 top was taken only 21 months later, so many things are possible.

Then there is the about 50% probability that it does not make it to the next top. But imagine where we would then invest our money 

And then buy some XMR as a hedge

[RAJSALLIN]

So Risto. If I understand you correctly you now think the failure risk of bitcoins is 50%? Sounds much more reasonable to me than the dramatically smaller risk for failure numbers you were speaking of half a year ago. Does this have to do with Monero entering the stage and the fact that you see chances growing for alternative coins or does it have to do with your view of bitcoin itself?

[rpietila]

So Risto. If I understand you correctly you now think the failure risk of bitcoins is 50%? Sounds much more reasonable to me than the dramatically smaller risk for failure numbers you were speaking of half a year ago. Does this have to do with Monero entering the stage and the fact that you see chances growing for alternative coins or does it have to do with your view of bitcoin itself?

Yes, if "failure" is defined to mean "will not rise to $5000+ ever".

Still if the probability for rising such is 50%, it is an incredibly good buy, and this is what I have been saying all along.

[rpietila]

50% of failure??

Damn, I'll be incredibly fucking fucked
I may not die but shit....
I would estimate it at 10% or 20% at most

Yes I would say that the chances that we are lower in 12 months than what we are now is 10-20%.

What an incredible +EV! 

[rpietila]

In Casino, the games of chance are also games of -EV. Now imagine that you could play a simple dice with the following payout table, but the play is limited to one round:

4-6: pay back 10:1
2-3: no effect
1: lose your bet.

How much would you bet?

[Zarathustra]

So Risto. If I understand you correctly you now think the failure risk of bitcoins is 50%? Sounds much more reasonable to me than the dramatically smaller risk for failure numbers you were speaking of half a year ago. Does this have to do with Monero entering the stage and the fact that you see chances growing for alternative coins or does it have to do with your view of bitcoin itself?

Yes, if "failure" is defined to mean "will not rise to $5000+ ever".

Still if the probability for rising such is 50%, it is an incredibly good buy, and this is what I have been saying all along.

I appreciate your posts, but did you know, that in reality there is no such thing as a 'probability'?

The so-called "Master Argument" was apparently first formulated clearly by Diodorus. He argued that the actual is the only possible. He observed that if something in the future is not going to happen, it was therefore true in the past that it would not happen.

Modern philosophers like J. J. C. Smart like to think that the future is "already out there" in the relativistic space-time continuum of the "block universe."

Modern determinists/compatibilists on free will like to argue that just as the past cannot be changed, so the future cannot be changed. "Change it from what to what?," says Daniel Dennett.

[Schickeria]

Looks to me like crypto in general is about to recover. BTC is becoming a fat laggard with his larger market cap on both: down- and upswings.

[rpietila]

I appreciate your posts, but did you know, that in reality there is no such thing as a 'probability'?

Explain why I am rich?

[Zarathustra]

I appreciate your posts, but did you know, that in reality there is no such thing as a 'probability'?

Explain why I am rich?

Because you smelled the one and only possible future. In other words, you have a better nose than your competitors.

[JayJuanGee]

In Casino, the games of chance are also games of -EV. Now imagine that you could play a simple dice with the following payout table, but the play is limited to one round:

4-6: pay back 10:1
2-3: no effect
1: lose your bet.

How much would you bet?

Risto:  I appreciate the scenario that you describe with the dice; however, I remain a little bit puzzled why you seem to want to continuously get your Monero book digs in - when in reality BTC is the ONLY "real" game in town. 

Maybe down the road this will change and Monero or some other Alt may come to play a fairly significant role in the crypto space.. ... In the mean time,  a very large share of the investments (including mainstream investors) are going into BTC and this does NOT seem likely to change (or move over to another coin) for quite some time - at least several years the way that things seem to be currently going. 

Also, there is NO real fundamental flaws with BTC even though one or more of some of these other cryptos may have some features that would be difficult to have assimilated into BTC.

In the end, I believe that the odds are greater than 50% that BTC will surpass $5k per BTC.... but it remains possible that it could take a few more years to get above that price level.

I don't have exact numbers in my head at the moment (whether it is 60% or 75% or some other number) b/c I do believe that it remains difficult to place exact numbers on the probabilities when there are so many factors and so many actors.  I suspect that   it could take anywhere between 1 month and 2 years to move BTC prices to the next ATH..... and probably higher likelihood that such a move above previous ATH would take place within the next 6-9 months.

[rpietila]

I remain a little bit puzzled why you seem to want to continuously get your Monero book digs in - when in reality BTC is the ONLY "real" game in town. 

Monero is the first alt (okay some said LTC a year ago..) that functions as a hedge to Bitcoin.

Same as Bitcoin is a hedge to paper assets.

Gold is a hedge to all.

This is very precious, to find an asset that has good positive EV and is a hedge. Everyone who has BTC does a pareto-improvement move by buying XMR, with 0.25%-5% of the holdings. This has nothing to do with taking a position, it is a slam dunk move if you invest professionally.

[wachtwoord]

So Risto. If I understand you correctly you now think the failure risk of bitcoins is 50%? Sounds much more reasonable to me than the dramatically smaller risk for failure numbers you were speaking of half a year ago. Does this have to do with Monero entering the stage and the fact that you see chances growing for alternative coins or does it have to do with your view of bitcoin itself?

Yes, if "failure" is defined to mean "will not rise to $5000+ ever".

Still if the probability for rising such is 50%, it is an incredibly good buy, and this is what I have been saying all along.

I appreciate your posts, but did you know, that in reality there is no such thing as a 'probability'?

The so-called "Master Argument" was apparently first formulated clearly by Diodorus. He argued that the actual is the only possible. He observed that if something in the future is not going to happen, it was therefore true in the past that it would not happen.

Modern philosophers like J. J. C. Smart like to think that the future is "already out there" in the relativistic space-time continuum of the "block universe."

Modern determinists/compatibilists on free will like to argue that just as the past cannot be changed, so the future cannot be changed. "Change it from what to what?," says Daniel Dennett.

It doesn't really matter whether probability theory is true in the pure definition of reality. What matters is that it's accurate from an individuals perspective.

[24Kilo]

Monero is the first alt (okay some said LTC a year ago..) that functions as a hedge to Bitcoin.

Same as Bitcoin is a hedge to paper assets.

Gold is a hedge to all.

rpietila,

Could you please elaborate on the factors or characteristics of XMR that you believe make it the 'first alt' that functions as a hedge to Bitcoin?

Why does XMR function as hedge better or rather than LTC or DRK, for example.

Thanks!

24Kilo

[Zarathustra]

So Risto. If I understand you correctly you now think the failure risk of bitcoins is 50%? Sounds much more reasonable to me than the dramatically smaller risk for failure numbers you were speaking of half a year ago. Does this have to do with Monero entering the stage and the fact that you see chances growing for alternative coins or does it have to do with your view of bitcoin itself?

Yes, if "failure" is defined to mean "will not rise to $5000+ ever".

Still if the probability for rising such is 50%, it is an incredibly good buy, and this is what I have been saying all along.

I appreciate your posts, but did you know, that in reality there is no such thing as a 'probability'?

The so-called "Master Argument" was apparently first formulated clearly by Diodorus. He argued that the actual is the only possible. He observed that if something in the future is not going to happen, it was therefore true in the past that it would not happen.

Modern philosophers like J. J. C. Smart like to think that the future is "already out there" in the relativistic space-time continuum of the "block universe."

Modern determinists/compatibilists on free will like to argue that just as the past cannot be changed, so the future cannot be changed. "Change it from what to what?," says Daniel Dennett.

It doesn't really matter whether probability theory is true in the pure definition of reality. What matters is that it's accurate from an individuals perspective.

This is true. I only find it interesting that we live in the illusion of an open future.

[NotLambchop]

...
Modern determinists/compatibilists on free will like to argue that just as the past cannot be changed, so the future cannot be changed. "Change it from what to what?," says Daniel Dennett. [/i]

The argument is much cleaner.  Goes like something like this:
"If all events are caused, then there are no uncaused events" (or "free volitions," in case of our minds).
In other words, if everything is subject to causality, so are our minds.  All our "choices" are caused by previous events, which are, in turn, also caused and so on.  Pretty consistent intrinsically .

So if the "Change it from what to what?" is pointing out that the question is not interesting, the system being sufficiently complex to make the future unknowable, then sure.  Don't know Daniel Dennett (had to google), but the clever line seems to be riffing on Voltaire's alleged reply to "life is hard": "compared to what?"

Sorry for ot.

[NewLiberty]

I remain a little bit puzzled why you seem to want to continuously get your Monero book digs in - when in reality BTC is the ONLY "real" game in town. 

Monero is the first alt (okay some said LTC a year ago..) that functions as a hedge to Bitcoin.

Same as Bitcoin is a hedge to paper assets.

Gold is a hedge to all.

This is very precious, to find an asset that has good positive EV and is a hedge. Everyone who has BTC does a pareto-improvement move by buying XMR, with 0.25%-5% of the holdings. This has nothing to do with taking a position, it is a slam dunk move if you invest professionally.

Monero is quite a bit more than merely a hedge though.
It holds a separate non-trivial innovation track that is not developed in Bitcoin.
 

[podyx]

Good time to buy monero right now?
Looking to diversify 0.5% of my btc holdings into it

Also what exchange do you guys trade on?