*this chart ends where OP's chart begins
Which bot was responsible for the previous bubbles?
mtgox was THE bitcoin exchange.
so we can assume that willy bot was active from the beginning of time.
Topic: For people still in denial about willy (Read 6562 times)
*this chart ends where OP's chart begins
Which bot was responsible for the previous bubbles?
mtgox was THE bitcoin exchange.
so we can assume that willy bot was active from the beginning of time.
Quote
Willy bought a very large amount of bitcoin on MtGox during the period of September 27 – November 30 during 2013 [...] a total of over 250,000 BTC.
MtGox volume, September 27 – November 30: 1.9M (btccharts data)
=> ~13% of total volume.
I take back the "drop in the ocean" remark. But you sure you want to continue talking about 'majority of volume at times'? I mean, I'm sure there were brief moments were 13% of the total happened to be the majority, but in total, 87% of the volume came from someone else.
Again: by your own standards, as posted in here by yourself, that's bullshit.
a) You have no way to tell what the market would have looked like without Willy.
b) There are valid arguments both stating that the impact of Willy shouldn't be underestimated (basically, constant buying adding low level pressure) and equally valid arguments limiting the upside of Willy's impact (basically, total Willy volume was a drop in the ocean).
c) It completely ignores China, which is widely considered to be at least one of the most important factors in the $1200 run-up.
d) It ignores that previous rallies ignited without Willy (i.e. Willy didn't run in 2011 and early 2013).
a) You have no way to tell what the market would have looked like without Willy.
b) There are valid arguments both stating that the impact of Willy shouldn't be underestimated (basically, constant buying adding low level pressure) and equally valid arguments limiting the upside of Willy's impact (basically, total Willy volume was a drop in the ocean).
c) It completely ignores China, which is widely considered to be at least one of the most important factors in the $1200 run-up.
d) It ignores that previous rallies ignited without Willy (i.e. Willy didn't run in 2011 and early 2013).
a) I don't need to guess how the market would have looked without willy, from the looks of it there is a highly significant correlation.
b) Willys volume wasn't a drop in the ocean but consisted of the majority of mtgox's volume at times.
c) China is a factor but I don't see it important enough that it makes the scenario of a bot driven rally unlikely because during that time they didn't have trading fees and the amount of liquidty was lower than mtgox. We can't know how much that contributed, and we don't have complete information on how much else was going on (like double reporting on trades, etc..)
Depending on that it could make the scenario more or less likely, but it won't change how plausible it is, only a complete explanation which is more plausible can do that.
d) Yes, it ignores previous rallies because they don't have anything to say about this rally, there could have been other bots we don't know about or there could have been a genuine hype, can't know so either we stop speculating altogether because "we can't know" or we ignore it. You don't have to tell me that Market psychology can lead to bubbles, and I don't need to tell you that exchange operators are shitheads.
In conclusion, it's not Bullshit, because I explicitly posted, I see the bot-caused-rally scenario as more plausible than other ones, not that it was what necessarily happened. Because, duh we can't know, only speculate.
I would also like to point out that I don't think that if the run-up to 1200 was caused by bots it has to end in a complete price collapse, others could pull the same stunt again, or the price can take off for technical or fundamental reasons. But it doesn't change that if the bots have driven the rally and if it happened with fake funds it was an epic scam (A plausible scam to be exact).
Just that we are clear.
anyone who was around in Nov. 2013 recalls clearly that the bull run stopped, in fact went into complete reversal for a few days to a week at around ~$700 when bitstamp had a banking backlog/issue of some sort?
explain to me again how willy on gox was "in charge" of the bull run?
explain to me again how willy on gox was "in charge" of the bull run?
If I'm not mistaken the willy report says that one of the bots was involved in the first 2013 run.
"Willy" traded September to November 2013.
"Markus" is probably what you have in mind, but a) where the reports on Willy are pretty detailed, there's a lot less info on Markus, and b) that still doesn't account for the huge $32 rally in 2011, or less extreme but still pretty impressive rally to $16 in late 2012.
Seriously, anyone who thinks rallies (or crashes) in any market need an external fraudulent "cause" is probably in deep denial about human nature and market behavior.
Quote
In short, our report did not mean to imply that Willy by itself caused or was a dominating part of the big price moves of late 2013 and early 2014, but merely that it would be hard to claim it did not contribute in some noticeable way to them. Considering the amount of bitcoin moved, those contributions could be large or small; the exact effects are very hard to estimate.
http://insidebitcoins.com/news/what-part-did-the-mt-gox-bot-really-play-in-the-bitcoin-price-bubble/30162
They're taking an pragmatic approach to dealing with the zealots of the cult. That's to be expected, I would. I'll bet they have been flooded with angry messages.
Gladly I'm not in the spotlight, so:
The scenario where the Willy & Markus bots not only played a major role but actually caused the rapid price inflation we've seen is more plausible than any other scenario I've heard of. I base this not only on the available data on the bots themselves but also on the observed social dynamics of the Bitcoin community, in particular how the mtgox bankruptcy went down.
Again: by your own standards, as posted in here by yourself, that's bullshit.
a) You have no way to tell what the market would have looked like without Willy.
b) There are valid arguments both stating that the impact of Willy shouldn't be underestimated (basically, constant buying adding low level pressure) and equally valid arguments limiting the upside of Willy's impact (basically, total Willy volume was a drop in the ocean).
c) It completely ignores China, which is widely considered to be at least one of the most important factors in the $1200 run-up.
d) It ignores that previous rallies ignited without Willy (i.e. Willy didn't run in 2011 and early 2013).
But yeah china played a major role, I guess what ElectricMucus is saying is that we don't know if the advent of china was made possible or more likely because willy and markus bots were pumping.
I guess we'll just never know
Quote
In short, our report did not mean to imply that Willy by itself caused or was a dominating part of the big price moves of late 2013 and early 2014, but merely that it would be hard to claim it did not contribute in some noticeable way to them. Considering the amount of bitcoin moved, those contributions could be large or small; the exact effects are very hard to estimate.
http://insidebitcoins.com/news/what-part-did-the-mt-gox-bot-really-play-in-the-bitcoin-price-bubble/30162
They're taking an pragmatic approach to dealing with the zealots of the cult. That's to be expected, I would. I'll bet they have been flooded with angry messages.
Gladly I'm not in the spotlight, so:
The scenario where the Willy & Markus bots not only played a major role but actually caused the rapid price inflation we've seen is more plausible than any other scenario I've heard of. I base this not only on the available data on the bots themselves but also on the observed social dynamics of the Bitcoin community, in particular how the mtgox bankruptcy went down.
Again: by your own standards, as posted in here by yourself, that's bullshit.
a) You have no way to tell what the market would have looked like without Willy.
b) There are valid arguments both stating that the impact of Willy shouldn't be underestimated (basically, constant buying adding low level pressure) and equally valid arguments limiting the upside of Willy's impact (basically, total Willy volume was a drop in the ocean).
c) It completely ignores China, which is widely considered to be at least one of the most important factors in the $1200 run-up.
d) It ignores that previous rallies ignited without Willy (i.e. Willy didn't run in 2011 and early 2013).
Amazing how the Marcus and Willy Bots all seemed to manipulate so many huge corporations into accepting Bitcoin. All this attention, all these companies pouring millions and millions of venture capital into the Bitcoin infrastructure.....because of a couple trading bots.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hskXarXtGBw
Trolls out in full force
Willy trolled Microsoft into accepting Bitcoin, that sneaky Willy!
Amazing how the Marcus and Willy Bots all seemed to manipulate so many huge corporations into accepting Bitcoin. All this attention, all these companies pouring millions and millions of venture capital into the Bitcoin infrastructure.....because of a couple trading bots.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hskXarXtGBw
Trolls out in full force
Quote
In short, our report did not mean to imply that Willy by itself caused or was a dominating part of the big price moves of late 2013 and early 2014, but merely that it would be hard to claim it did not contribute in some noticeable way to them. Considering the amount of bitcoin moved, those contributions could be large or small; the exact effects are very hard to estimate.
http://insidebitcoins.com/news/what-part-did-the-mt-gox-bot-really-play-in-the-bitcoin-price-bubble/30162
They're taking an pragmatic approach to dealing with the zealots of the cult. That's to be expected, I would. I'll bet they have been flooded with angry messages.
Gladly I'm not in the spotlight, so:
The scenario where the Willy & Markus bots not only played a major role but actually caused the rapid price inflation we've seen is more plausible than any other scenario I've heard of. I base this not only on the available data on the bots themselves but also on the observed social dynamics of the Bitcoin community, in particular how the mtgox bankruptcy went down.
Quote
In short, our report did not mean to imply that Willy by itself caused or was a dominating part of the big price moves of late 2013 and early 2014, but merely that it would be hard to claim it did not contribute in some noticeable way to them. Considering the amount of bitcoin moved, those contributions could be large or small; the exact effects are very hard to estimate.
http://insidebitcoins.com/news/what-part-did-the-mt-gox-bot-really-play-in-the-bitcoin-price-bubble/30162
i hope, it come again and rise the price to 2k at the very least
but i think it was helped by chinese, or maybe was a chinese bot?
We'll not need willy next time. People will naturally come in as the objectively inferior payment methods compared to Bitcoin continue scamming their lifes.but i think it was helped by chinese, or maybe was a chinese bot?
The future is decentralized: Decentralized electric batteries and generators, decentralized maidsafe internet and decentralized bitcoin currency. Get in now or suicide later after acknowledging you missed the boat.
The Money Powers be like:
MONEY POWERS: "Guys, the Bitcoin Protocol is starting to seep into the Public Consciousness. We have to slow down the rise by convincing newcomers that Bitcoin doesn't add any value to the global economy. Quick, tell them a trading bot is solely responsible for the 10 Million+ Percent Price rise. Get Mark Karpeles on the phone. We'll offer him a carrot or a stick to comply. Then pay a bunch of internet trollers a quarter a post to spam the web and support our narrative."
we would have simply been on a slowly increasing incline from $50 over the last couple years.
In a dead straight line as well...
I think speculation on what would have happened without the bots is a pointless exercise. Because the action caused by the bots influenced the trading decisions of may people and there is no basis for extrapolating what they would have done if the bots hadn't existed.
just like the analysis of the bots that have walked us down from $600 after the July breakout.
what are you raving about? pure conjecture?
thought as much.
I think speculation on what would have happened without the bots is a pointless exercise. Because the action caused by the bots influenced the trading decisions of may people and there is no basis for extrapolating what they would have done if the bots hadn't existed.
just like the analysis of the bots that have walked us down from $600 after the July breakout.
I think speculation on what would have happened without the bots is a pointless exercise. Because the action caused by the bots influenced the trading decisions of may people and there is no basis for extrapolating what they would have done if the bots hadn't existed.
^This
I think speculation on what would have happened without the bots is a pointless exercise. Because the action caused by the bots influenced the trading decisions of may people and there is no basis for extrapolating what they would have done if the bots hadn't existed.
The idea of Willy and Marcus makes me feel good.
Because it means without them, we would have simply been on a slowly increasing incline from $50 over the last couple years.
And all this bullshit about Bitcoin being too volatile wouldn't be the mantra of naysayers.
All this bullshit about Bitcoin being a failure due to huge crashes, wouldn't even be in the discussion.
All these claims of hundreds of millions being lost or stolen wouldn't even exist.
There would be nothing but an impressive gradual increase over time, as would have been expected.
This is why when say Karpeles and Gox fucked Bitcoin more than any other entity, I agree with them.
-B-
Because it means without them, we would have simply been on a slowly increasing incline from $50 over the last couple years.
And all this bullshit about Bitcoin being too volatile wouldn't be the mantra of naysayers.
All this bullshit about Bitcoin being a failure due to huge crashes, wouldn't even be in the discussion.
All these claims of hundreds of millions being lost or stolen wouldn't even exist.
There would be nothing but an impressive gradual increase over time, as would have been expected.
This is why when say Karpeles and Gox fucked Bitcoin more than any other entity, I agree with them.
-B-
Alright. Let's say we are no longer "in denial" about willy.
The bot existed. Created plenty of buying pressure and drove up price.
So, how about the evidence that it wasn't a customer funded, exchange internal bot, running to split up large orders of gox'preferred clientswhales over a longer time span to minimize costs? As in: who says Willy didn't have the USD behind it?
I mean, I get it... I dislike gox as much as anyone in here. There's at least a real chance that they have been running a fractional reserve for a long time, and the last "bubble" was created without new money coming in (to a degree at least). However, "chance" is not the same as "proof".
The bot existed. Created plenty of buying pressure and drove up price.
So, how about the evidence that it wasn't a customer funded, exchange internal bot, running to split up large orders of gox'
I mean, I get it... I dislike gox as much as anyone in here. There's at least a real chance that they have been running a fractional reserve for a long time, and the last "bubble" was created without new money coming in (to a degree at least). However, "chance" is not the same as "proof".
First of all, there's no way Mark would program that shit. I think it's quite telling when Schrem said recently that he literally had to beg Mark to change a single line of code, and that they had to post him humus and schnitzels from New York to entice him away from his cat. But let's say the function was legitimate, why would you rotate the accounts? It makes no sense. If it was to split large whale orders, why not use one account or run accounts simultaneously?
Jump to: