Topic: Monthly average USD/bitcoin price & trend - page 10. (Read 118200 times)
I'm curious to see where the next point on the graph in the OP will end up!
But it's not simply that "It can't be", but rather the general observation that infrastructure wise, we're not really there.
Infrastructure implementation also increases exponentially. Expect new exchanges to pop up at an ever more rapid pace, while existing exchanges also grow more or less exponentially. They'll buy the needed servers and hire the needed people to continue supporting this growth.
The standard S-curve should still apply. Bitcoin is its own worst enemy right now. Bitcoin in its current form acts as a payment protocol and a virtual commodity. This wild speculative pricing is based on it being a commodity. Its qualities as a payment protocol works against the price as you don't need any more than you use to send if you have a better store of value. Bitcoin needs further development through things like colored coins to make it act as a truly valuable negotiable instrument. Then you'll be able to factor in derivatives and competing Bitcoin-based currencies that overwhelms the suppression factor as merely a payment protocol. Then we can begin to see factorial growth.
Taking just the data from the last two years is obvious cherry-picking (I have yet to see a less brain-damaged justification than "when exchanges started working properly"). How about taking all data and fitting it to a super-exponential curve? If fitness were better than the exponential trend presented in this thread the theory would be confirmed in my opinion (and the rate of growth would surely be lower than that "$100000 before autumn" nonsense).
I would like to see this too. The problem is that very early measuring points are likely to be really inaccurate.
+1. Howbout if somebody older than me would actually take the effort to research into the early days. I was not here then. I think a few hours of actual work (instead of posting) would take us far!
That log-log chart is pretty amazing. While I doubt that we have the data to either confirm or deny this trend line, the near target seems completely unattainable to me at the moment. The log chart seems a reasonable pace within which to build out the necessary infrastructure for the next phases of adoption. But I have no illusions that I know what will truly happen. Continual mind blowing is the name of this game.
The one element of the log-log chart that does resonate intuitively to me (makes me suspect that the red log trend may be conservative), is that in each explosive drive upward BTC has achieved - in essentially one big push - an increase of 1 order of magnitude. ie. 1 >10>100>1000... so it does not seem unbelievable that the same could happen from 1000>10000. So do we wait down below 1000 for the next year and explode up? Could be. But I find that very hard imagine too. And of course the past may not predict....
Adoption comments and random thoughts..
As to the adoption issue...my own small universe of friends who are not technically or financially inclined, have just now started to get serious about pressuring me for information about how to get a piece. These people intuitively get what is happening, without really needing or wanting to completely understand it. They just want to buy (at a good price) before the next explosion. At this point, I send them all to Coinbase, which the no-brainer here in the US. The feedback has been unanimously tremendous in terms of their experience with the functionality and simplicity. They all come away more impressed and confident in bitcoin. The truth is, there is no where else I would send anybody like that right now. I can only assume that coinbase in going to dominate in the next year. Can they handle all the growth that is coming? Are others at that professional level coming on line?
And then Wall Street money coming in will not require the level of consumer friendly apps etc , so we may accept/integrate this new money with little strain to the existing infrastructure. With perhaps more accessible public adoption and payment options in 2015.
It has been an amazing year. So grateful to be on this ride - on so many levels. And next year at this time we will have a lot more data to play with!
Thanks and happy new year to all.
The one element of the log-log chart that does resonate intuitively to me (makes me suspect that the red log trend may be conservative), is that in each explosive drive upward BTC has achieved - in essentially one big push - an increase of 1 order of magnitude. ie. 1 >10>100>1000... so it does not seem unbelievable that the same could happen from 1000>10000. So do we wait down below 1000 for the next year and explode up? Could be. But I find that very hard imagine too. And of course the past may not predict....
Adoption comments and random thoughts..
As to the adoption issue...my own small universe of friends who are not technically or financially inclined, have just now started to get serious about pressuring me for information about how to get a piece. These people intuitively get what is happening, without really needing or wanting to completely understand it. They just want to buy (at a good price) before the next explosion. At this point, I send them all to Coinbase, which the no-brainer here in the US. The feedback has been unanimously tremendous in terms of their experience with the functionality and simplicity. They all come away more impressed and confident in bitcoin. The truth is, there is no where else I would send anybody like that right now. I can only assume that coinbase in going to dominate in the next year. Can they handle all the growth that is coming? Are others at that professional level coming on line?
And then Wall Street money coming in will not require the level of consumer friendly apps etc , so we may accept/integrate this new money with little strain to the existing infrastructure. With perhaps more accessible public adoption and payment options in 2015.
It has been an amazing year. So grateful to be on this ride - on so many levels. And next year at this time we will have a lot more data to play with!
Thanks and happy new year to all.
I don't think the pre-2011 data is really that relevant, if at all.
How is the behavior of a very small bartering ecosystem ( I don't even know if we should call pre-2011 a market ) supposed to provide us valuable data for today's market?
I feel like the pre-2011 stuff is historically nice data to have, but it might just be noise on the formulas.
How is the behavior of a very small bartering ecosystem ( I don't even know if we should call pre-2011 a market ) supposed to provide us valuable data for today's market?
I feel like the pre-2011 stuff is historically nice data to have, but it might just be noise on the formulas.
http://finance.fortune.cnn.com/2013/12/31/fortress-is-forming-a-bitcoin-fund/
This should keep the super exponential growth humming along nicely next year!
This should keep the super exponential growth humming along nicely next year!
My alternative approach - log vs log(log) from 01.11.2011 to present. Conclusion: The log-log model seems to better fit the data than the linear-log model, and according to this model we are actually slightly under the trend line. Comments?
If each exchange doubles its capacity in time x and the number of exchanges also doubles in time x, it seems possible.
Possible - but keep in mind that there are many completely unpredictable processes.
Firstly the legal development cannot stop Bitcoin as a whole but it may have a tremendous effect on the price curve. Recent actions in China and India have shown what can happen.
Secondly underlying not identified risks may occur and implicate the development. Eg. information about lost coins which will eventually break down the value of Bitcoin at all. There was a very informative presentation on this point: http://tinyurl.com/lfzlhvp
Thirdly one of the altcoins or some unforseen new technology inventions could take over a bigger part of the market.
For now it looks like the curve will continue its surge but on the other side a breakdown could also stop Bitcoins success. Bitcoin is not that long in the market that it would survive every drawback like gold.
Apart from these points the very nice diagram does not look like the green log°log for me. Maybe it is log°log but with changed parameters - it should be more close to the red log line.
Taking just the data from the last two years is obvious cherry-picking (I have yet to see a less brain-damaged justification than "when exchanges started working properly"). How about taking all data and fitting it to a super-exponential curve? If fitness were better than the exponential trend presented in this thread the theory would be confirmed in my opinion (and the rate of growth would surely be lower than that "$100000 before autumn" nonsense).
I would like to see this too. The problem is that very early measuring points are likely to be really inaccurate.
+1. Howbout if somebody older than me would actually take the effort to research into the early days. I was not here then. I think a few hours of actual work (instead of posting) would take us far!
I would think the data in the early days would be less relevant anyways? As time goes on the data should become more reliable instead of less reliable, just as the success of Bitcoin is now more likely than it was a year ago let's say?
But for someone out there that enjoys punching numbers (not me!) please go ahead.
The data is good enough, taking noise into consideration have never added any reliability to the outcome; trades pre-gox are mostly noise.
Taking just the data from the last two years is obvious cherry-picking (I have yet to see a less brain-damaged justification than "when exchanges started working properly"). How about taking all data and fitting it to a super-exponential curve? If fitness were better than the exponential trend presented in this thread the theory would be confirmed in my opinion (and the rate of growth would surely be lower than that "$100000 before autumn" nonsense).
I only post what I have observed, and what I have observed is in those graphs. I don't know why it works only from 1.11.2011 because I where not following bitcoin at that time, so I have to ask if anything special happened around that time. Its probably possible to fit the whole period, but I suspect it would look rather ugly in the start. Also graphing for prices less than 1$ does not work for log-log unless using complex numbers, so it has to be graphed in cents or lower. Ill do it eventually.
Taking just the data from the last two years is obvious cherry-picking (I have yet to see a less brain-damaged justification than "when exchanges started working properly"). How about taking all data and fitting it to a super-exponential curve? If fitness were better than the exponential trend presented in this thread the theory would be confirmed in my opinion (and the rate of growth would surely be lower than that "$100000 before autumn" nonsense).
I would like to see this too. The problem is that very early measuring points are likely to be really inaccurate.
+1. Howbout if somebody older than me would actually take the effort to research into the early days. I was not here then. I think a few hours of actual work (instead of posting) would take us far!
Ducky1, nice graph; I also wondered for most of 2013 why suddenly this radical departure from a steady exponential growth; your log(log) idea is certainly explaining that behaviour. I guess we'll see in 3 months
As for adoption, last month bitcoin has seen more coverage than the previous 4 years. My friends who barely know what Windows is, much less browse internet for anything other than email, already know about bitcoin because they heard about it somewhere, and that was a big surprise for me recently (of course, they don't *understand*, but they've heard - important, too). So 2013 was the year of recognition, 2014 would be the year of adoption.
As for adoption, last month bitcoin has seen more coverage than the previous 4 years. My friends who barely know what Windows is, much less browse internet for anything other than email, already know about bitcoin because they heard about it somewhere, and that was a big surprise for me recently (of course, they don't *understand*, but they've heard - important, too). So 2013 was the year of recognition, 2014 would be the year of adoption.
While it is too tempting. Let's not get too carried away by this. Log(Log)) chart implies Bitcoin will be a Million dollar each before end of 2014.
I don't think many here are getting carried away in the sense that we assume much predictive power to this in a serious way. ("It cannot go on forever" certainly applies).
We just don't have the infrastructure or adoption for it yet.
Infrastructure, I agree. Adoption: well, this whole thing is adoption-driven, so adoption is predicted (if you use this model as prediction) by the model itself.
My alternative approach - log vs log(log) from 01.11.2011 to present. Conclusion: The log-log model seems to better fit the data than the linear-log model, and according to this model we are actually slightly under the trend line. Comments?
Wow ... that's some wild-ass result you got!! ... but hard to argue with the math, the fit looks good (just eyeballing but some best-fit stats would be nice) if we are indeed in the super-exponential phase (vertical) right now.
If he's right we've been going super exponential from the start. That's the point.
That's uber-bullish, but can exchanges currently handle that rate of growth?
If each exchange doubles its capacity in time x and the number of exchanges also doubles in time x, it seems possible.
My alternative approach - log vs log(log) from 01.11.2011 to present. Conclusion: The log-log model seems to better fit the data than the linear-log model, and according to this model we are actually slightly under the trend line. Comments?
Let me get this straight: we've been going super exponential all this time?
Could you draw this out on a log(log) chart as well?
It seems (visually) log(log)) actually does fit better. LOL.
Taking just the data from the last two years is obvious cherry-picking (I have yet to see a less brain-damaged justification than "when exchanges started working properly"). How about taking all data and fitting it to a super-exponential curve? If fitness were better than the exponential trend presented in this thread the theory would be confirmed in my opinion (and the rate of growth would surely be lower than that "$100000 before autumn" nonsense).
I would like to see this too. The problem is that very early measuring points are likely to be really inaccurate.
Taking just the data from the last two years is obvious cherry-picking (I have yet to see a less brain-damaged justification than "when exchanges started working properly"). How about taking all data and fitting it to a super-exponential curve? If fitness were better than the exponential trend presented in this thread the theory would be confirmed in my opinion (and the rate of growth would surely be lower than that "$100000 before autumn" nonsense).
The average trend of 12.4x per year may indeed be the magic number that captures the highest possible growth rate that takes into account all the factors above. It has hardly changed at all during the last 12 months.
My general comment re:the trendlines starting in 11/2011 is that the choice of starting point is arbitrary, which distorts the trend.
11-2011 is perhaps the start of well working exchanges? I'm to new to really know about this part of history.
New trading platforms coming online soon-ish http://www.coindesk.com/bitcoin-trading-platform-coinsetter-close-raising-1-5m-new-capital/
Jump to: