Monthly average USD/bitcoin price & trend - page 11.

marcus_of_augustus

legendary

Activity: 3920

Merit: 2349

Eadem mutata resurgo

Quote from: Voodah on December 31, 2013, 02:08:18 AM

Quote from: marcus_of_augustus on December 31, 2013, 01:58:03 AM

Quote

It seems more like a "It' can't be" reaction then "To da Moon" for most people.

This. The objection is more of an out of hand rejection on grounds of a fundamental disbelief ("It can't be") than a sound, reasoned rejection of the numbers ... the math does not lie, we just have to be sure of the assumptions.

To be fair, I'm still in the "It can't be" camp ... but bad assumptions are more dangerous than bad calculations.

But it's not simply that "It can't be", but rather the general observation that infrastructure wise, we're not really there.

Do you really see our current exchanges handling 100x their current load in just 6-7 months from now?

Even if they somehow technologically make it and others pop up to help, how about the banking situation? Bureaucracy takes time.

I agree ... but that doesn't stop the speculative adoption (price) getting way ahead of the utility adoption, and the utility infrastructure that can actually handle that price ....

rpietila

donator

Activity: 1722

Merit: 1036

Quote from: Voodah on December 31, 2013, 02:08:18 AM

But it's not simply that "It can't be", but rather the general observation that infrastructure wise, we're not really there.

Do you really see our current exchanges handling 100x their current load in just 6-7 months from now?

Even if they somehow technologically make it and others pop up to help, how about the banking situation? Bureaucracy takes time.

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.

Voodah

sr. member

Activity: 266

Merit: 250

Quote from: marcus_of_augustus on December 31, 2013, 01:58:03 AM

Quote

It seems more like a "It' can't be" reaction then "To da Moon" for most people.

This. The objection is more of an out of hand rejection on grounds of a fundamental disbelief ("It can't be") than a sound, reasoned rejection of the numbers ... the math does not lie, we just have to be sure of the assumptions.

To be fair, I'm still in the "It can't be" camp ... but bad assumptions are more dangerous than bad calculations.

But it's not simply that "It can't be", but rather the general observation that infrastructure wise, we're not really there.

Do you really see our current exchanges handling 100x their current load in just 6-7 months from now?

Even if they somehow technologically make it and others pop up to help, how about the banking situation? Bureaucracy takes time.

marcus_of_augustus

legendary

Activity: 3920

Merit: 2349

Eadem mutata resurgo

Quote

It seems more like a "It' can't be" reaction then "To da Moon" for most people.

This. The objection is more of an out of hand rejection on grounds of a fundamental disbelief ("It can't be") than a sound, reasoned rejection of the numbers ... the math does not lie, we just have to be sure of the assumptions.

To be fair, I'm still in the "It can't be" camp ... but bad assumptions are more dangerous than bad calculations.

BitChick

legendary

Activity: 1148

Merit: 1001

Quote from: Roger_Murdock on December 31, 2013, 12:20:27 AM

So here's an "explanation" for why super-exponential growth might not be completely crazy.

Lots of people have speculated that Bitcoin's adoption might follow the familiar "S-curve" that's been seen with many other new technologies. And, of course, the initial part of the S-curve looks like exponential growth. And so that's been used to justify the underlying exponential (or so we thought) growth trend for Bitcoin's price that we've witnessed over the past four years. But why should we assume that the relationship between the rate of adoption and the price is linear? And, in fact, if the rate of adoption is a measure of the number of users, isn't there at least some reason to expect a non-linear relationship with price? After all, if there are n users in the Bitcoin network, there are n(n-1) / 2 total possible connections.

kdrop objected that the super-exponential trendline would put us at a million dollars per coin by the end of 2014 which, I have to admit, does seem a tad too optimistic. But isn't the simple response that the super-exponential trend will only hold true for the initial phase of our now-modified S-curve? On the other hand, hitting the slowdown / saturation phases in 2014 doesn't feel right to me.

Thoughts?

Maybe the psychological issue of people not wanting to spend so much per coin or fragment of coin could come into play? I have heard many say that they are "too expensive" etc. I would hope that next year the more widespread use of mBTC is used which will spur on the super-exponential growth I believe. But it waits to be seen.

I would think anyone that purchased coins in January of 2013 and saw them grow to almost 100x their investment this year would be a believer that anything can happen! There is some math to back it up too. It is not like these numbers are based on just "wishful thinking." It seems more like a "It' can't be" reaction then "To da Moon" for most people.

Roger_Murdock

sr. member

Activity: 342

Merit: 250

So here's an "explanation" for why super-exponential growth might not be completely crazy.

Lots of people have speculated that Bitcoin's adoption might follow the familiar "S-curve" that's been seen with many other new technologies. And, of course, the initial part of the S-curve looks like exponential growth. And so that's been used to justify the underlying exponential (or so we thought) growth trend for Bitcoin's price that we've witnessed over the past four years. But why should we assume that the relationship between the rate of adoption and the price is linear? And, in fact, if the rate of adoption is a measure of the number of users, isn't there at least some reason to expect a non-linear relationship with price? After all, if there are n users in the Bitcoin network, there are n(n-1) / 2 total possible connections.

kdrop objected that the super-exponential trendline would put us at a million dollars per coin by the end of 2014 which, I have to admit, does seem a tad too optimistic. But isn't the simple response that the super-exponential trend will only hold true for the initial phase of our now-modified S-curve? On the other hand, hitting the slowdown / saturation phases in 2014 doesn't feel right to me.

Thoughts?

BitChick

legendary

Activity: 1148

Merit: 1001

Quote from: kdrop22 on December 30, 2013, 08:05:22 PM

Quote from: Ducky1 on December 30, 2013, 05:54:24 PM

Quote from: wachtwoord on December 30, 2013, 05:37:43 PM

Quote from: Ducky1 on December 30, 2013, 05:23:19 PM

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? Shocked

Could you draw this out on a log(log) chart as well?

It may be just a fluke, but super exp. at least fits best for this time period. Here is a log log chart. The blue lines above and below is drawn by hand. The actual price in log-log space have been added manually to the ~~left~~ right of the vertical axis. The chart was not really meant for publication so a bit rough.

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. We just don't have the infrastructure or adoption for it yet.

True. 2015 is OK. That gives everyone a little more time to get the infastructure in place. Wink

kdrop22

full member

Activity: 238

Merit: 100

Quote from: Ducky1 on December 30, 2013, 05:54:24 PM

Quote from: wachtwoord on December 30, 2013, 05:37:43 PM

Quote from: Ducky1 on December 30, 2013, 05:23:19 PM

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? Shocked

Could you draw this out on a log(log) chart as well?

It may be just a fluke, but super exp. at least fits best for this time period. Here is a log log chart. The blue lines above and below is drawn by hand. The actual price in log-log space have been added manually to the ~~left~~ right of the vertical axis. The chart was not really meant for publication so a bit rough.

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. We just don't have the infrastructure or adoption for it yet.

BitChick

legendary

Activity: 1148

Merit: 1001

Quote from: wachtwoord on December 30, 2013, 06:05:40 PM

Quote from: Ducky1 on December 30, 2013, 05:54:24 PM

Quote from: wachtwoord on December 30, 2013, 05:37:43 PM

Quote from: Ducky1 on December 30, 2013, 05:23:19 PM

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? Shocked

Could you draw this out on a log(log) chart as well?

It may be just a fluke, but super exp. at least fits best for this time period. Here is a log log chart. The blue lines above and below is drawn by hand. The actual price in log-log space have been added manually to the left of the vertical axis. The chart was not really meant for publication so a bit rough.

Thanks a lot for sharing this. Very interesting

BEST CHART EVER!!!! Grin

I have never been so excited about log charts!

Ducky1

hero member

Activity: 966

Merit: 500

📱 CARTESI 📱 INFRASTRUCTURE FOR SCA

Btw, I would like to thank justusranvier https://bitcointalksearch.org/user/justusranvier-14492 for pointing out the log-log last night on the speculation forum https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=178336.74340

wachtwoord

legendary

Activity: 2324

Merit: 1125

Quote from: Ducky1 on December 30, 2013, 05:54:24 PM

Quote from: wachtwoord on December 30, 2013, 05:37:43 PM

Quote from: Ducky1 on December 30, 2013, 05:23:19 PM

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? Shocked

Could you draw this out on a log(log) chart as well?

It may be just a fluke, but super exp. at least fits best for this time period. Here is a log log chart. The blue lines above and below is drawn by hand. The actual price in log-log space have been added manually to the left of the vertical axis. The chart was not really meant for publication so a bit rough.

Thanks a lot for sharing this. Very interesting

Ducky1

hero member

Activity: 966

Merit: 500

📱 CARTESI 📱 INFRASTRUCTURE FOR SCA

Quote from: marcus_of_augustus on December 30, 2013, 05:42:46 PM

Quote from: Ducky1 on December 30, 2013, 05:23:19 PM

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.

Yes.. take them with a grain of salt though. The fit factors are on the chart (0.9451 for log-log and 0.9098 for log)

Ducky1

hero member

Activity: 966

Merit: 500

📱 CARTESI 📱 INFRASTRUCTURE FOR SCA

Quote from: wachtwoord on December 30, 2013, 05:37:43 PM

Quote from: Ducky1 on December 30, 2013, 05:23:19 PM

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? Shocked

Could you draw this out on a log(log) chart as well?

It may be just a fluke, but super exp. at least fits best for this time period. Here is a log log chart. The blue lines above and below is drawn by hand. The actual price in log-log space have been added manually to the ~~left~~ right of the vertical axis. The chart was not really meant for publication so a bit rough.

Voodah

sr. member

Activity: 266

Merit: 250

Quote from: wachtwoord on December 30, 2013, 05:50:32 PM

Quote from: marcus_of_augustus on December 30, 2013, 05:42:46 PM

Quote from: Ducky1 on December 30, 2013, 05:23:19 PM

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?

wachtwoord

legendary

Activity: 2324

Merit: 1125

Quote from: marcus_of_augustus on December 30, 2013, 05:42:46 PM

Quote from: Ducky1 on December 30, 2013, 05:23:19 PM

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.

marcus_of_augustus

legendary

Activity: 3920

Merit: 2349

Eadem mutata resurgo

Quote from: Ducky1 on December 30, 2013, 05:23:19 PM

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.

wachtwoord

legendary

Activity: 2324

Merit: 1125

Quote from: Ducky1 on December 30, 2013, 05:23:19 PM

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? Shocked

Could you draw this out on a log(log) chart as well?

Ducky1

hero member

Activity: 966

Merit: 500

📱 CARTESI 📱 INFRASTRUCTURE FOR SCA

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?

oper128

newbie

Activity: 28

Merit: 0

New interesting concept here: https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/bitcoin-future-price-formula-published-by-italian-bitcointalk-member-392117

bitrider

full member

Activity: 233

Merit: 101

Quote from: marcus_of_augustus on December 28, 2013, 02:24:13 PM

So if this trend line is based on assumption of exponential growth phase of adoption curve has there been any consideration to modelling when we begin to approach the saturation level?

I'm just wondering what a sigmoid curve will look like on this log plot (actually I know) but want to see it plotted ... and if there is any sign that the exponential growth may be starting to level off will we be able to see/anticipate that?

See

https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/stephen-reeds-million-dollar-logistic-model-366214

Topic: Monthly average USD/bitcoin price & trend - page 11. (Read 118242 times)