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

[kkaspar]

That's my point, you act like people aren't aware of the risks already. Go run along and do something else.

I just bought a couple more just to spite people like you.

People sure aren't acting like they are aware of the risks already. I'll probably get my account banned soon, so you don't have to see my name any longer. Can't promise that you won't see my text anymore though.

The last line you wrote was a little weird. To me, that's like shooting yourself in the foot just to spite people like me :/

yea, that's why he is buying bitcoin. to spite you.

pitch that one to your shrink. might be productive.

I wonder if I'll speak more, then will he buy more bitcoins with the current market, just to spite me?

[av123]

All aboard!!
Choo Choo is about to start in the next 72 hours !!!
ALL in BTC , leveraged to the MAX!

Fonzie the super bull?  

[aminorex]

So current stamp walls, such as they are, are at 600, 630, 650.  More like stairsteps than walls, but hey, one observes what one can.

[Chalkbot]

Risk is not the only thing people are evaluating with bitcoin. To simplify;

If you could only choose from 2 investment options, one that paid 5% returns 95% of the time and another that paid 1000% returns 20% of the time, making that decision based on the risk alone would give you a flawed conclusion. (Not that this is representative of the situation, just illustrating that there are more factors to base this decision on than risk)

So while you may be going around warning of the risks, assuming we didn't take those into consideration because we've reached a different conclusion than you, instead start asking yourself what other benefits people might be seeing that you are not. I don't know of a lot of people in bitcoin that are not aware of the risks. Even if you explain it to someone who has zero exposure, they are going to start asking questions about risks, be it government regulation, or security, or what have you.

[MAbtc]

I did draw some charts to meet your conditions, but I don't understand why this should be predictive, rather than coincidental.

The theory underlying the hypothesis is that under low volatility conditions the longer-term trends are more likely to predominate.  The linear trend angle from the past period of low volatility represents what would be expected at a constant absolute rate of growth, when all the shorter-term noise is filtered out.  The logarithmic trend angle from the past period represents what would be expected at a constant compounding rate of growth, likewise.  Since the current rate of growth is between these two extremes, I consider the angle to be expected bounds for any extended period of low volatility.

Low volatility on what time frame? This can be true until those conditions cease to exist. What evidence suggests to you that they will continue? How do you distinguish between trends and counter trends?

It seems that this relies on an "extended period of low volatility", which I think necessarily omits many possibilities for price performance.

[podyx]

All aboard!!
Choo Choo is about to start in the next 72 hours !!!
ALL in BTC , leveraged to the MAX!

[seljo]

All aboard!!
Choo Choo is about to start in the next 72 hours !!!
ALL in BTC , leveraged to the MAX!

I would go full fiat if I wasnt hodling.

[aminorex]

Risk is not the only thing people are evaluating with bitcoin.

I agree, and would add that risk is often taken to be synonymous with volatility, but of course that is a gross oversimplification used only because it leads to generally tractable, often closed-form  modeling, and because under tractable assumptions it is practically useful to estimate stopping and draw-down times, among other things.  Without it we wouldn't have black-sholes, etc., many obviously useful (albeit fundamentally flawed) models.

When actual risk is swamped by volaility, those who discount risk/reward on the basis of volatility will grossly overestimate risk, and those who estimate it more accurately have a huge advantage.  They will buy more and at higher prices, and therefore hold more when appreciation occurs.  They will hold through the volatility.  I think that many "weak hands" in bitcoin are the result of mistaking risk and vol.  This may be the only advantage which technical people have over wall street types:  They understand the fundamental risks better, and are less likely to mistake them with volatility.

[threecats]

It's not just risk. People are voting with their resources for a different world. Lord forbid such brave foolhardy actions. We hold these truths to be self evident ...

[delphic]

Also I know most people aren't interested but DOGE is seriously crashing right now.

uh...yeah

and I am very very dissapoint that this thread did not inform me in time

dumb thread...bah

 

I guess it is because this is the Bitcoin Wall thread.

if you have ever watched a Doge, you will know that it just pisses on walls.

[aminorex]

I did draw some charts to meet your conditions, but I don't understand why this should be predictive, rather than coincidental.

The theory underlying the hypothesis is that under low volatility conditions the longer-term trends are more likely to predominate.  The linear trend angle from the past period of low volatility represents what would be expected at a constant absolute rate of growth, when all the shorter-term noise is filtered out.  The logarithmic trend angle from the past period represents what would be expected at a constant compounding rate of growth, likewise.  Since the current rate of growth is between these two extremes, I consider the angle to be expected bounds for any extended period of low volatility.

Low volatility on what time frame? This can be true until those conditions cease to exist. What evidence suggests to you that they will continue? How do you distinguish between trends and counter trends?

It seems that this relies on an "extended period of low volatility", which I think necessarily omits many possibilities for price performance.

Agreed.  I don't have a model for volatility right now.  I'm just observing that vol is low, and using the present value of vol as the best estimator of the future value of vol -- which is often a justifiable assumption, but not in this case since there's no real vol arb available.  But pattern matching this post-spike curve to the previous one, the pattern continuation is a low-vol one for a good stretch of time.  Absent new information, I tend to use pattern recognition as a constructive prior.  Always looking for new information, however.

[adamstgBit]

I just come back from the bank. pretty sure they have no clue what they are doing. CCMF

[aminorex]

It's not just risk. People are voting with their resources for a different world. Lord forbid such brave foolhardy actions. We hold these truths to be self evident ...

While that may motivate you to invest in bitcoin, it probably won't prevent you from selling it if it looks like it's going to drawdown beyond your tolerance.  It may increase your tolerance, however.

[threecats]

It's not just risk. People are voting with their resources for a different world. Lord forbid such brave foolhardy actions. We hold these truths to be self evident ...

While that may motivate you to invest in bitcoin, it probably won't prevent you from selling it if it looks like it's going to drawdown beyond your tolerance.  It may increase your tolerance, however.

many rivers. one ocean.

[Tyson95]

How much do Americans move the Bitcoin markets? All of the good news that I've seen come from the US doesn't seem to impact prices much.

[EuroTrash]

K I know the consensus is bearish by now and we might be geared towards midterm steady decline... But that cute small bid wall at 600 on stamp ain't getting any smaller. 'Ts a few hours it's been there by now... Are panic sellers running out of coins to dump?

[rpietila]

When consensus is bearish (everyone has sold already), it is time to buy. Like now, I see that there is very little downside and explosive upside in as little as 2 months.

Btw. I am in the process of coauthoring (with sirius) an e-book about "History of Bitcoin Economy". What would you like to have discussed?

[JayJuanGee]

Well this thread sure isn't the best playground to hold this debate, it's moving too fast.

[snip]
However, that does NOT mean that we are going to agree that we should throw away our existing system, prior to the more broader implementations of these various innovations.

I do not advocate the "throwing away of our existing system". In fact, here is what I advocated some posts ago:

I advocate the movement towards the anarchy part of the spectrum. Not in any violent, preferably not even sudden manner, because I think that would cause confusion and suffering. I do this because I am convinced that decentralized/voluntary/anarchistic forms of societal organization are far superior to centralized forms in terms of their efficiency.

I can see why you would project that thought at me. As with any group of people, dogmatic, oversimplifying people seem to be a vocal majority among anarchists.

[snip]
if you are proposing another system, then let us know what that would be exactly and how it would play out.  

I really feel like debating Bitcoin with someone who just keeps asking me "yes OK I understand it is decentralized, but WHO RUNS IT? WHO CONTROLS IT?" I have told you, that I am advocating movement towards anarchy. How would you describe the "system" of anarchy? You don't, because there is no one single system. The point I keep repeating here is that you and I do not know what particular system would be better suited to our needs, nor do we know how a system change would play out and to claim we do is to engage in humongous hubris. It does not follow, though, that there can be no such system. The thought, that the best possible system can be devised by a person or a group seems ridiculous to me. I am saying that we should treat society more like an organism, which grows from the inside out, than a mechanism, which is assembled from its constituent parts according to a central plan, to fulfill certain functions.

Incidentally I am all in favor of this:

However, that does NOT mean that we are going to agree that we should throw away our existing system, prior to the more broader implementations of these various innovations.

I have suggested this before: to simply "cancel" the government right now would probably prove disastrous in the short term. The culture, the infrastructure, practically everything is not ready for this, because there are no alternatives ready. Government has a too dominant role in most important areas of human life. In many of them they ban competition. Before we can transition to any kind of hypothetical government-free state, these alternatives need to be created first, otherwise the transition might prove too painful. Quitting cold turkey might not be advisable in this state of high addiction to government.

What I am saying is let us work on creating these alternatives. If you do not wish to participate, I sympathize (but why are you involved with Bitcoin, I wonder?). You keep asking me to provide proof that they can work, but how can I do that? We need to try, to find out. Besides, I have already stated that it might indeed be the case, that governmental organizations have been a necessary part of civilization until the advent of the internet. But I feel that with this technology at hand, we need to re-test this belief. I have provided no "proof", nor real life examples, just a bunch of concepts and explanations, speculations and musings on why self-organizing, decentralized systems exhibit properties of emergent order and why that might be a good thing to apply to society. What more can I provide? I don't have your desired thought out central plan how to achieve decentralization.  Should I go on about how Wikipedia is superior to the Encyclopedia Britannica due to its decentralized nature?

Anyways, I'm happy for you that you seem to be quite content with the current system. Hope you can appreciate people trying to explore alternatives and tolerate their sometimes heretical thoughts while they do so. In the end if the result is having more freedom of choice, you'll be better off to. Or is the freedom of choice between different flavors of government enough for you?

Largely, I agree with many of your points that you made in the above post - except to the extent to which you are summarize my position in various ways.  Personally, I am getting the sense that you are NOT mis-describing my points on purpose..... , but you are in good faith attempting to respond.


Surely, there appear to be several variations  within positions that want to get rid of or to minimize government.     In that regard, your position seems to differ somewhat from other libertarian or anarchical frame works, , which I had NOT been attempting to get into those kinds of quagmires of discussions.

I am NOT opposed to change, and I am NOT opposed to lessening government or getting rid of it, in the event that better systems can be established.  Bitcoin can certainly assist in the direction of providing freedom to greater numbers of people and transparency to monetary and/or other transactional systems. 

I recall that this current line of discussion regarding the role of government began with the assertion that taxes  are like theft and then further implications that the government is like a pack of thieves. I chimed in that portion of the discussion to point out the extent to which that kind of thinking is fantastical and really lacking in meaningful logic (over simplifying the state of taxation and the role of government).  Surely there are a lot of flaws in government and abuses and misuses of taxes about which I agree, and my intention has NOT been to get into those kinds of discussions in order to point out that theft and taxes are NOT nearly the same thing.... and we have been having near meaningless communications on the topic, ever since.

  There are people in this thread who want to continue to proclaim that taxation is the same as theft, which we should recognize on the face of it how preposterous and absurd a claim that remains ;;; but NONETHELESS some people in this thread want to argue regarding  basic and silly points, like that..

[donut]

 There are people in this thread who want to continue to proclaim that taxation is the same as theft, which we should recognize on the face of it how preposterous and absurd a claim that remains ;;; but NONETHELESS some people in this thread want to argue regarding  basic and silly points, like that..

It's actually extortion, which is a form of theft.

I'll try to lay it out.


Extortion (also called shakedown, outwresting, and exaction) is a criminal offense of obtaining money, property, or services from a person, entity, or institution, through coercion. Refraining from doing harm is sometimes euphemistically called protection. Extortion is commonly practiced by organized crime groups. The actual obtainment of money or property is not required to commit the offense. Making a threat of violence which refers to a requirement of a payment of money or property to halt future violence is sufficient to commit the offense. Exaction refers not only to extortion or the unlawful demanding and obtaining of something through force,[1] but additionally, in its formal definition, means the infliction of something such as pain and suffering or making somebody endure something unpleasant.
src

Coercion /koʊˈɜrʃən/ is the practice of forcing another party to act in an involuntary manner by use of intimidation or threats or some other form of pressure or force, and describes a set of various different similar types of forceful actions that violate the free will of an individual to induce a desired response. These actions can include, but are not limited to, extortion, blackmail, torture, and threats to induce favors. In law, coercion is codified as a duress crime. Such actions are used as leverage, to force the victim to act in a way contrary to their own interests. Coercion may involve the actual infliction of physical pain/injury or psychological harm in order to enhance the credibility of a threat. The threat of further harm may lead to the cooperation or obedience of the person being coerced.
src

Can you really tell me with a straight face that taxation is not extortion?

[podyx]

When consensus is bearish (everyone has sold already), it is time to buy. Like now, I see that there is very little downside and explosive upside in as little as 2 months.

Btw. I am in the process of coauthoring (with sirius) an e-book about "History of Bitcoin Economy". What would you like to have discussed?

did somebody say $5k in july??