I thought it would be obvious why I used a log scale, but here we go again...
Imagine the price is $100. Let's say it moves up to $200. How much has the price increased? $100?
Now let's say the price is at $100 again. This time it moves down to $0. How much has the price decreased? $100?
Okay, that means that going to $200 is the inverse of going to $0. If bulls believe Bitcoin will go to $200, the bears must believe it will go to $0. Right?
If something doesn't seem right, that's because a linear scale for a price chart is preposterous.
Topic: Bitcoin's largest crash in history: Tale of the tape & why a recovery is likely (Read 2201 times)
April 19, 2013, 09:16:21 AM
April 19, 2013, 02:51:36 AM
i spelled it out in 3 simple steps for you in post #17
April 19, 2013, 02:22:59 AM
you are skilled at continually avoiding every point brought against you
you play the fool at the highest of levels
everyones got something going for them
you play the fool at the highest of levels
everyones got something going for them
You still haven't explained why you acted such an arseclown when all I did was try to explain to you what I thought you misunderstood.
A simple " I didn't mean that" would have sufficed but instead I get sarcasm about a "6th grade math lesson". Since then I've just been trying to relate to you in a manner with which you seem comfortable.
April 19, 2013, 02:21:29 AM
I skipped four because there have been some tribal groups in various parts of the world which have been sheltered from the civilizing influence of we bridge-builders, that have been discovered to be capable of holding a group of four in their minds.
Who can't hold a group of four in their mind? What the hell is wrong with everyone?
April 19, 2013, 02:19:08 AM
you are skilled at continually avoiding every point brought against you
you play the fool at the highest of levels
everyones got something going for them
you play the fool at the highest of levels
everyones got something going for them
April 19, 2013, 02:15:59 AM
there is no deeper meaning. its very straightfoward. since you are having difficulty:
1. BTC Books makes claim
2. i respond with "oh really?" questioning his claim
3. you proceed to argue something irrelevant and completely different than BTC Books' claim. in fact, all you do is simply explain to us what a log scale is. thanks for your insight pal.
and then in your latest response you completely ignore and cut out my last line which actually discusses the claim. i guess you no longer want to discuss the topic, you'd rather instead make sarcastic remarks to save face.
1. BTC Books makes claim
2. i respond with "oh really?" questioning his claim
3. you proceed to argue something irrelevant and completely different than BTC Books' claim. in fact, all you do is simply explain to us what a log scale is. thanks for your insight pal.
and then in your latest response you completely ignore and cut out my last line which actually discusses the claim. i guess you no longer want to discuss the topic, you'd rather instead make sarcastic remarks to save face.
Sarcastic? lol oh really?
April 19, 2013, 02:03:43 AM
why do you use log scale for the chart?
Because humans think in terms of comparative relationships - not in terms of absolute numerical value.
lol oh really?
Oh really. If I buy BTC at $5 and it doubles in price to $10 when I sell, I double my money. If I buy at $100 and sell at $200, I still double my money.
Changes to the btc price are relative - if it was as easy for the price to jump from $5 to $10 as it is from $100 to $105, then you wouldn't use a log y axis. But it's not so you should.
my contention was regarding the claim that "humans think comparatively, not in terms of absolute numeric value"
Sorry - I didn't notice a contention there at all! How could I have missed the deeper meanings of "lol oh really?". I feel like such an idiot.
there is no deeper meaning. its very straightfoward. since you are having difficulty:
1. BTC Books makes claim
2. i respond with "oh really?" questioning his claim
3. you proceed to argue something irrelevant and completely different than BTC Books' claim. in fact, all you do is simply explain to us what a log scale is. thanks for your insight pal.
and then in your latest response you completely ignore and cut out my last line which actually discusses the claim. i guess you no longer want to discuss the topic, you'd rather instead make sarcastic remarks to save face.
April 19, 2013, 01:22:00 AM
I dunno I have perfect ability to visualize large numbers... via grouping.
I can think of 5 soldiers standing abreast, then I can think of 5 rows of soldiers. Then I can abstract them to a group of 25 and think of those in groups 10 by 10... and so on..
Now I may not be able to reasonably visualize 10,000 indistinct objects at the same time... but that is more of a limitation with focus than mental capacity. Because each indistinct object takes a moment to visualize, 5 objects, thats easy, you can see all 5 together as a group, or you can see each one individually.. or maybe pan across them, stopping briefly on one, then the next and the next... So what do you do when you have a stupidly high number of objects? by the time you get to 100 you've probably forgotten what you were doing.
though for my point here.. Log scale is reasonable and useful as any.
I can think of 5 soldiers standing abreast, then I can think of 5 rows of soldiers. Then I can abstract them to a group of 25 and think of those in groups 10 by 10... and so on..
Now I may not be able to reasonably visualize 10,000 indistinct objects at the same time... but that is more of a limitation with focus than mental capacity. Because each indistinct object takes a moment to visualize, 5 objects, thats easy, you can see all 5 together as a group, or you can see each one individually.. or maybe pan across them, stopping briefly on one, then the next and the next... So what do you do when you have a stupidly high number of objects? by the time you get to 100 you've probably forgotten what you were doing.
though for my point here.. Log scale is reasonable and useful as any.
April 19, 2013, 01:21:37 AM
Because humans think in terms of comparative relationships - not in terms of absolute numerical value.
What's not a very good way to think btw. What matters to your life is not whether your investment made you 5% or 5.000% but whether you earned $50 or $50.000.
It works when making savings to. For example, people are capable of making some effort in order to save $100 in a $200 purchase. But most people wouldn't even care about a saving of $100 when buying a house. And it's $100 in both cases, the exact same value...
(not questioning the display of the price in logarithmic scale though,... if you want to measure variance, that seems to make sense)
April 19, 2013, 01:20:28 AM
Two days past the biggest one-week crash in Bitcoin history. What have we learned? What should we expect next?
Two important things we learned: one, Bitcoin isn't really stable yet, and two, a bubble will pop as soon as everyone stops calling it a bubble. But is the bubble done?
In my opinion, yes. A glance at Bitcoin's brief history reveals that at no time did the correction from a rally to all-time heights, bubble or not, dip below the high from before the rally. That is, the only rallies that were smaller than their corrections were rallies that are corrections themselves.
Normally, there would be months of downtrend after a new all-time high (even more if the rally was big). However, the record-breaking crash of late happened to shave off almost the last month of growth. And that last month of growth started from $32—the point where the previous all-time high rested.
My claim is that the rally did not start until one month ago when $32 was broken—everything before that was a correction from $2. If history holds, this bubble's popping will not overtake the rally that caused it. And if the rally started at $32, then it looks like the bubble has finished its popping.
I'm not saying that we will have an easy path to $200 by any chance. If the last bubble was any indication, it could be years until we reach $260 again, even though there's less ground to be made up this time. But I will claim it's easier to get to $260 than it is to $40, which at the current price means the price is likely to recover.
So let us wait and see.
we only dropped from 200 whatever because of a dodgey exchange. This event has given great impetus for other exchanges to open and, the market will be come more resiliant
Rubbish, if there was confidence in the price then the downed exchange wouldn't have had an effect.
nope.jpg not when 70% of newbs have never experienced a downturn/or any access to their ability to exchange for FIAT, this will happen cyclically as exchanges get attacked and the next set of newbs sell out and go ape. This is further compunded by their being just one large exchange. Over time though people will become jaded to ddos, and the price will more or less stay the same....in fact many of the older hands will welcome them as a chance to pick up cheap coins from newbs. The time to sell is at near or full market penetration if then....which will be in the 5 - 100 Trillion mark divided by the number of CryptoCurrencies that will make it...and that's a way off yet.....me I am buying up PPC.....it is by far the best and least understood CC demonstrated by the fact no one has copied it yet. PPC is at where BTC was at 2 years ago and may surpass BTC.
April 19, 2013, 01:14:52 AM
thanks for pointing out the obvious the 6th grade math lesson
my contention was regarding the claim that "humans think comparatively, not in terms of absolute numeric value"
there is certainly absolute whole numbers that humans think about. you only need to look at the order book any day and see where the walls of liquidity are
Here's a thought-experiment for you:
Think of the number three. Just that. And in your head you will see three whatevers; side by side, and equidistant from one another.
Now... think of the number five. In your head you will see a group of three and a group of two - distinct from one another, but equidistant within their own group. That's how we think in numbers. We are actually (and this is experimentally verified - has been for decades) incapable of thinking about large numbers as numerical values.
PS: I skipped four because there have been some tribal groups in various parts of the world which have been sheltered from the civilizing influence of we bridge-builders, that have been discovered to be capable of holding a group of four in their minds.
April 19, 2013, 01:05:50 AM
why do you use log scale for the chart?
Because humans think in terms of comparative relationships - not in terms of absolute numerical value.
lol oh really?
Oh really. If I buy BTC at $5 and it doubles in price to $10 when I sell, I double my money. If I buy at $100 and sell at $200, I still double my money.
Changes to the btc price are relative - if it was as easy for the price to jump from $5 to $10 as it is from $100 to $105, then you wouldn't use a log y axis. But it's not so you should.
thanks for pointing out the obvious the 6th grade math lesson
Glad you found it helpful.
my contention was regarding the claim that "humans think comparatively, not in terms of absolute numeric value"
Sorry - I didn't notice a contention there at all! How could I have missed the deeper meanings of "lol oh really?". I feel like such an idiot.
Edit: Fixed at johnblaze's request.
there is certainly absolute whole numbers that humans think about. you only need to look at the order book any day and see where the walls of liquidity are
April 19, 2013, 12:58:28 AM
why do you use log scale for the chart?
Because humans think in terms of comparative relationships - not in terms of absolute numerical value.
lol oh really?
Oh really. If I buy BTC at $5 and it doubles in price to $10 when I sell, I double my money. If I buy at $100 and sell at $200, I still double my money.
Changes to the btc price are relative - if it was as easy for the price to jump from $5 to $10 as it is from $100 to $105, then you wouldn't use a log y axis. But it's not so you should.
thanks for pointing out the obvious the 6th grade math lesson
my contention was regarding the claim that "humans think comparatively, not in terms of absolute numeric value"
there is certainly absolute whole numbers that humans think about. you only need to look at the order book any day and see where the walls of liquidity are
April 19, 2013, 12:44:16 AM
why do you use log scale for the chart?
Because humans think in terms of comparative relationships - not in terms of absolute numerical value.
lol oh really?
Oh really. If I buy BTC at $5 and it doubles in price to $10 when I sell, I double my money. If I buy at $100 and sell at $200, I still double my money.
Changes to the btc price are relative - if it was as easy for the price to jump from $5 to $10 as it is from $100 to $105, then you wouldn't use a log y axis. But it's not so you should.
April 19, 2013, 12:41:09 AM
why do you use log scale for the chart?
Because humans think in terms of comparative relationships - not in terms of absolute numerical value.
lol oh really?
Really.
We only invented numbers so bridges wouldn't fall down.
But our thinking is all about comparing stuff: stuff to stuff.
You think when Slim thinks about Gates he's got an endless line of zeros flashing through his brain? Nah. Piles... how big are the piles.
April 19, 2013, 12:34:25 AM
why do you use log scale for the chart?
Because humans think in terms of comparative relationships - not in terms of absolute numerical value.
lol oh really?
April 19, 2013, 12:20:25 AM
Rubbish, if there was confidence in the price then the downed exchange wouldn't have had an effect.
That isn't entirely true.The crash happened because it is quick to transfer bitcoin, but slow to transfer fiat currencies.
You can assume 2-4 days to get money in to an exchange, rarely would it ever take less.
And so mtgox goes down, people move to other exchanges to sell and buy. The people trying to sell get in first, and eat up the lions share of fiat very quickly. This of course pushes the price down. Much of the drive to drop is by people who just need to move bitcoins out, not really as interested in the price and their main exchange being down. Such as a business who is recieving bitcoins and exchanges them for USD as soon as possible to lock in the current price they are selling at. (and with the price dropping rapidly... the faster you sell it, the more secure that price is)
Then as we saw, a few days after the crash, fiat began to pump back in to the system and the crash stabilized.
Lesson Learned? Keep currency on multiple exchanges. Don't put all your damned eggs in one basket.
April 19, 2013, 12:13:07 AM
why do you use log scale for the chart?
Because humans think in terms of comparative relationships - not in terms of absolute numerical value.
April 19, 2013, 12:07:54 AM
why do you use log scale for the chart?
April 18, 2013, 08:20:26 PM
Two days past the biggest one-week crash in Bitcoin history. What have we learned? What should we expect next?
Two important things we learned: one, Bitcoin isn't really stable yet, and two, a bubble will pop as soon as everyone stops calling it a bubble. But is the bubble done?
In my opinion, yes. A glance at Bitcoin's brief history reveals that at no time did the correction from a rally to all-time heights, bubble or not, dip below the high from before the rally. That is, the only rallies that were smaller than their corrections were rallies that are corrections themselves.
Normally, there would be months of downtrend after a new all-time high (even more if the rally was big). However, the record-breaking crash of late happened to shave off almost the last month of growth. And that last month of growth started from $32—the point where the previous all-time high rested.
My claim is that the rally did not start until one month ago when $32 was broken—everything before that was a correction from $2. If history holds, this bubble's popping will not overtake the rally that caused it. And if the rally started at $32, then it looks like the bubble has finished its popping.
I'm not saying that we will have an easy path to $200 by any chance. If the last bubble was any indication, it could be years until we reach $260 again, even though there's less ground to be made up this time. But I will claim it's easier to get to $260 than it is to $40, which at the current price means the price is likely to recover.
So let us wait and see.
we only dropped from 200 whatever because of a dodgey exchange. This event has given great impetus for other exchanges to open and, the market will be come more resiliant
Rubbish, if there was confidence in the price then the downed exchange wouldn't have had an effect.
Jump to: