rpietila Wall Observer - the Quality TA Thread ;)

[seleme]

It doesnt mean alot alone

I'm sure some people will use it as a signal and sell.  Sad, but true.

Indeed 

[1714753949]

1714753949

[1714753949]

1714753949

[1714753949]

1714753949

[1714753949]

1714753949

[creekbore]

It doesnt mean alot alone

I'm sure some people will use it as a signal and sell.  Sad, but true.

Best ignore all those pesky TA signals...after all its not like we're in the quality TA thread...no, wait

Seriously, ( <------ and not dour)
We've not had a true bear market since 2012, it was always going to happen.
Breathing space to improve and consolidate infrastructure, get BTC out of beta
And most importantly, realign people's expectations.

[jmw74]

one miner has 10% of network hash rate all in one location in East Washington.

Absolutely wrong, and since you can't handle being corrected, it's pointless to continue arguing with you. Don't bother replying, you're now on /ignore.

I just put him on /ignore too.  If he were half as brilliant as he thinks he is, he wouldn't be spending his days ranting here.  He's a crackpot, drawing nutty conclusions that don't logically follow from his list of (sometimes useful) facts.  He combines an arrogant and dismissive attitude with sheer volume of text, that beats everyone into submission via intimidation or exhaustion.  I'm done, everyone else can reach their own conclusion on whether to listen to him.

[thefunkybits]

It doesnt mean alot alone

I'm sure some people will use it as a signal and sell.  Sad, but true.

Indeed 

I've been finding that *right* when a crossover happens is the best time to buy and usually the time of most panic... on a 1 Week timeframe that might be hard to to judge when that panic comes but I'm ready for it 

[windjc]

oh boy....thoughts on what happens if this crosses over Rpietila? do you expect a prolonged downtrend?

It doesn't make me feel much better that we have crossed below the 300 EMA for 3 days now and it has acted like resistance twice in that timeframe. This is the first time this has happened since 2011 (maybe early 2012),

[AnonyMint]

Global hashing power is estimated at about 39.5 petahash, putting Carlson's 2.2 petahash at about 5.6 percent of the world's total.

What was it you claimed? Let me see...

one miner has 10% of network hash rate all in one location in East Washington.

Absolutely wrong, and since you can't handle being corrected, it's pointless to continue arguing with you. Don't bother replying, you're now on /ignore.

I guess you are incapable of realizing that you have not formed a viable retort to my point that mining is becoming incredulously centralized. Pedantic arguments over 6% versus 10% for one miner is something that children throwing sand do, not serious men who realize that it doesn't make any difference to the threat facing us.

In short, you waste the time of everyone with your childish ego problem.

Armstrong has written in the past that when he writes a rumor it always comes from a very high level source (and he has many connections in government he even hobnobs with the central bankers, Congressmen, etc):

http://armstrongeconomics.com/2014/03/30/even-cuba-abandons-communism-when-will-we/

Obama’s dream – raise taxes back to where they were before Reagan – 70%. That is the word behind the curtain and he may use war to accomplish that.

The following audio interview is an eyeopener (listen to the whole thing as it adds a lot that isn't quoted below):

http://www.dailypaul.com/314402/complete-breakdown-of-financial-controls-in-us-government-says-austin-fitts

Former HUD Assistant Housing Secretary and investment advisor Catherine Austin Fitts...

“I don’t see Obamacare as something designed to offer healthcare. … I think the question comes down to a bigger one, which is, are we going to create a society where one hundred percent of everything is digitized and under central control?”

“Well, you have a complete breakdown of internal financial controls in the US government. … You had over $4 trillion of what is called undocumentable adjustments and to this day, [these agencies] have never, as required by law, produced audited financial statements.”

“In my experience, government is not incompetent at all. … Gridlock is a cover story, incompetence is a cover story. There is a plan, you just can’t see what it is.”

[mgburks77]

what in your opinion happens to those big farms if the price hits -$200?

[AnonyMint]

Thanks, Peter.

I just put one chart upon the other in photoshop and it astonished me how well they fit.

How could adoption grow this quickly?
You have answered that question better than I could.

You also make me realize a very good point:
the supercrash of 2015 (100k to 3k) would correspond to the CHASM of bitcoin adoption (1-3%).
That correspondence increases the probability of the 2014 superbubble scenario, in my opinion.

Thanks again for your fractal chart.  Just to confirm: is the vertical scale stretched on the photoshopped version?  The growth spurt predicted in % for the "super bubble" is actually bigger than the growth spurt in 2011, correct?  Do you know what the scaling factor is?

In my opinion, for bitcoin to witness a "super bubble," we'd need ETFs trading on NASDAQ or NYSE and significant deployment of bitcoin ATMs around the world.  People must have he ability to buy big.  Therefore, I think the bubble would have to occur either after the ETFs are available, or, more likely, the bubble would start a month before the ETF is ready (due to pre-emptive buying by insiders).  Since I doubt we'll see ETFs until late 2014 or 2015, a huge ramp in price before the fall 2014 would surprise me (but I am not implying that the price will remain stable at $450 either).  

Witnessing a "super bubble" would be fascinating.  I expect the media would begin to talk about all the benefits of bitcoin that we've known all along, as well as trivialize its challenges.  It would be a 180 deg shift in sentiment.  Some of the people you know who have dismissed bitcoin up to this point would become users, while simultaneously maintaining the view that it makes sense now (Bitcoin 2.0) because it's been "cleaned up" or it's "matured" or some nonsense like that.  

And then it would crash harder than ever.  

NOTE TO READERS: this is not a prediction--just a thought experiment.  

Peter R at al, before you go on with this nonsense direction of thinking about arbitrary charts which have no basis in reality like they came from a child with an Etch-A-Sketch (not ad hominem to Trolololo, just trying to color my point with drama), and since I know you try to be based in data and fact checking, I suggest you try to find even one example in this history of man where the adoption accelerated after it was evidently slowing. And remember I am talking about rate of growth, not the nominal size of growth. The nominal size is getting larger and huge, and this will make us feel like the growth is growing, because humans can't differentiate between slowing rate and larger nominals.

You won't find it. Larger things don't suddenly change adoption curves, because the inertia is ingrained structure that provided the very high adoption rate in the beginning.

I am very confident because I have history and rationality on my side.

[aminorex]

what in your opinion happens to those big farms if the price hits -$200?

Blockchain fork would appear to be the dominating strategy.

[windjc]

what in your opinion happens to those big farms if the price hits -$200?

Blockchain fork would appear to be the dominating strategy.

What do you mean? Who would that help? That would just hurt everyone.

[SlipperySlope]

what in your opinion happens to those big farms if the price hits -$200?

Those big farms are likely running at a loss right now, considering the need to continually upgrade their hashing power. Cheap power cost does not solve this major problem of Bitcoin ASIC mining.

But even if miners are better off in the long run simply buying and holding bitcoin, they are still better off mining compared to conventional business investment because the next bubble will vastly increase the value of any coins they have not yet exchanged, thus ensuring that if they can hold on, they will prosper. I understand for example that the operator of the US Washington State bitcoin ASIC farm has a personal holding of over 1000 BTC.

[mgburks77]

it maybe that a sub $200 price is where it will settle, naturally resolving the massive misallocation of resources represented by a 2.2 peta hash facilities etc

could be a blessing in disguise for decentralized mining

[AnonyMint]

oh boy....thoughts on what happens if this crosses over Rpietila? do you expect a prolonged downtrend?

Told ya so. Yet again my holistic view coming true...

It doesnt mean alot alone

I'm sure some people will use it as a signal and sell.  Sad, but true.

Not sad. It is necessary to form a bottom. That is good.

what in your opinion happens to those big farms if the price hits -$200?

Those big farms are likely running at a loss right now, considering the need to continually upgrade their hashing power. Cheap power cost does not solve this major problem of Bitcoin ASIC mining.

But even if miners are better off in the long run simply buying and holding bitcoin, they are still better off mining compared to conventional business investment because the next bubble will vastly increase the value of any coins they have not yet exchanged, thus ensuring that if they can hold on, they will prosper. I understand for example that the operator of the US Washington State bitcoin ASIC farm has a personal holding of over 1000 BTC.

Correct. He said he already paid back his initial investment numerous times over. Low-cost power is a key factor. Thus victors to the one who can locate with economies-of-scale. This is why ASICs will drive incredulous centralization. It will only get worse over time.

[windjc]

oh boy....thoughts on what happens if this crosses over Rpietila? do you expect a prolonged downtrend?

Told ya so. Yet again my holistic view coming true...

Do you realize how fucking annoying you are? Do you??

I couldn't care less what you say because of HOW YOU SAY IT. The fact that you can't comprehend this one BASIC human communication fact, shows that you are seriously lacking basic communication skills at all. You aren't even able to feign humility. You are just a forum douchbag. And the general population isn't going to ever listen or follow someone who they percieve is a douchebag.

Get a grip on yourself man.

[windjc]

it maybe that a sub $200 price is where it will settle, naturally resolving the massive misallocation of resources represented by a 2.2 peta hash facilities etc

could be a blessing in disguise for decentralized mining

It would be the end of bitcoin. Sort of like Internet startups in 2001.

If we go below $200, bitcoin would slide to sub $50 and never recover.  Game over.

So if we "drop" to 4x higher than we were just over a year ago, its game over? Hmmm. Ok.

[aminorex]

I am very confident because I have history and rationality on my side.

I would be cautious of normalcy bias.  We are dealing with iterated expansive maps.   Such systems can diverge rapidly.  It's a new technology and will introduce novel system dynamics.  Very few external analysts foresaw the collapse of the Soviet Union.  There is strong self-similarity in the price curve.  The manias seen so far may be higher order.  

If your log-logistic model is a MAP estimation, I would say it has strong empirical and analytic support, which would push the fractal fit (already quite unlikely, according to my own understanding, but still a possible expression of a distinctly conceivable set of dynamics) outside of the range of interesting possibilities.  But if log-logistic fit doesn't have a principled justification, with definable likelihoods (and I haven't seen that yet) then I would not exclude cascade models which typically produce such curves in other markets.  

You say that declining rates of adoption reversing would be unprecedented.  I say, how long have you been looking for them?  And, how many deviations lie between the current rate and the rate which would be implied by the fractal chart?   The history of AAPL comes to mind as a case of the former.  Regarding the latter, if it is within a couple of deviations, then it would not be surprising if the decline in growth were noise.  (And the more so, in a heteroskedastic model.)

[AnonyMint]

There is no "game over" for Bitcoin. Just as the adoption won't accelerate the current acceleration, it also won't decelerate the current acceleration. Compounded growth is acceleration of nominal, even when the rate of compounding is declining. Humans are very fooled by this.

We are merely finding an equilibrium where the reality is, not where Risto et al's linear fit to a non-linear curve tricked everyone into  thinking the equilibrium was. Risto is still believing his own Koolaid. Fantastical dreams diehard.

what in your opinion happens to those big farms if the price hits -$200?

Blockchain fork would appear to be the dominating strategy.

What do you mean? Who would that help? That would just hurt everyone.

If the government regulates the mining to take over, the price will not go down and there won't be any mass exodus nor fork, it will go up. And the masses will pour in. That comes later when it is time for that stage in Bitcoin's natural adoption nexus.

Bitcoin was carefully designed for this outcome by some very astute strategists. Appears to be the work of a black budget think tank.

Note my prior post I provided a link to Catherine Austin Fitts audio interview wherein she describes the $4 trillion black budget of the USA. It is incredulous but true. Secretary of Defense Rumsfield confirmed $2.3 trillion of it the day before 9/11 and then all the records were destroyed by the missleairplane that hit the Pentagon the next day. Armstrong has also written about this and has inside knowledge. Just last week, a smoking gun book was published by Jim Rickards (former covert agent) who was in the room with the government and also corroborated by Max Keiser's first hand conversions with Cantor Fitzgerald admitting that government was aware of the short options on two airlines before 9/11.

[aminorex]

what in your opinion happens to those big farms if the price hits -$200?

Blockchain fork would appear to be the dominating strategy.

What do you mean? Who would that help? That would just hurt everyone.

Only if you take future appreciation as axiomatic (or extremely probable).  On a delta-neutra/efficient-market assumption, current price is the best predictor of future price, and your future as a miner is that you will be condemned to eternal losses.  Much better to defect, use massive hash power to fork the chain, adopting software which is designed to make the fork more appealling to more fiat -- as, e.g., if the IMF were to make an offer, or perhaps just tweaking the parameters, reducing the long-term rewards and asymptotic money supply in exchange for larger immediate rewards for the current miners, preserving existing bitcoin wallets, but attacking and re-forking all other branches into oblivion, so that entrenched owners have no choice but to play along.  Anything is better than infinite losses.

[mgburks77]

Bitcoin was carefully designed for this outcome by some very astute strategists. Appears to be the work of a black budget think tank.

Really, what other possible conclusions are there?

[AnonyMint]

Bitcoin was carefully designed for this outcome by some very astute strategists. Appears to be the work of a black budget think tank.

Really, what other possible conclusions are there?

None. If you have a holistic nexus of data that I have collected over the past several years.

But everyone is free to have their own theory.

Do I have a confirmation bias? Surely do. Nevertheless if any one can present an argument which doesn't make a mockery of Occam's Razor, I will listen. All I've heard is naive theory of a lone man doing this, covering all his tracks like a covert agent yet not being one. A brilliant lone cryptography researcher whom no one ever heard of, never published anything before, who managed to obfuscate his activity from all his family and friends.

And "he" (Satoshi Inc) predicted all the ill effects and was promoting them, e.g. he expected ASICs and corporations to take control of mining.