Topic: rpietila Wall Observer - the Quality TA Thread ;) - page 276. (Read 907212 times)

Value is  more important for fishers law.  Active nodes is more important for metcalfes law.  This is the chart which should theoretically and does in practice fit the price baseline.  Deviations from the baseline are not signal but noise under metcalfe.

Isn't value more important than quantity.

The longer I used Bitcoin starting in 2013, the more addresses I had. I think I may have left dormant addresses with very small BTC balances and have since forgotten about them. Possibly more and more transactions to self in different accounts, or more and more smaller accounts, e.g. remember Coinbase has a feature where someone can email someone some BTC and that person claims it by signing up with Coinbase.

Did Peter R's Metcalf law fit use value of transactions or number of transactions?

I don't think the fundamental adoption has any correlation with the dives in the price as you can see on your chart above. Actually your chart does show a correlation in April 2013.

Ah I just looked. Exactly as expected. There are the two spike bull traps, then the third crash down to below the prior bubble's peak. Same chart pattern.

agreed...this indicator is very telling (and accurate)!

This is the chart which matters:
https://blockchain.info/charts/n-unique-addresses?showDataPoints=false&show_header=true&daysAverageString=7×pan=2year&scale=1&address=

Exponential fundamentals remain in place.

You just provided an example of my point about the market psychology, "It is different this time, this is unique so don't apply usual market analysis".

No offense intended, I used to be a silver tinfoil hat dude too.

For silver when the Fed started the massive QE in 2009, that was the Koolaid the silver bugs needed to run the price from $9 up to $49 (and run the silver to gold ratio down to low 30s). Now the reality has hit that hyperinflation has never and will will never occur in a reserve currency.

For Bitcoin when the press pumped out the news of the USA Congressional hearings lovefest and China's growing interest past Fall, then the Bitcoin bugs took that to mean it was going to the moon. Now the reality has hit that China Inc. is trying to suppress Bitcoin and Bitcoin can't become a currency without governments agreeing not to tax it with capital gains (as if we didn't know that before, but if I tried to tell people they told me to shut up and got nasty with me).

I suggest to Risto that he run his trendline fit on silver and see if the trendline was predicting silver would be several $100s by now? Trendline fitting is like any TA, it is correct about 50% of the time.  

I expect a U bottom on Bitcoin, not a V. So every time we see a V, I will expect it is another bull trap. Perhaps the V traps are because everyone is thinking along the line-of-thought as if Risto's trendline is gospel and we are already behind where the price "should be".

First rule of speculation, never ever tell yourself something is impossible. That is when it will bite you in the arse. We have to look at all the possibilities especially when the only evidence we have is some arbitrary trendline fit.

Again I could be wrong about all of this. Just sharing. Don't sell based on what I wrote then get angry at me if I am wrong.

I should take a look at the shape of the chart for the crash in 2011 where all the early adopters were sure Bitcoin was going to moon.

Where is the evidence of this increased adoption though?

Surely the most obvious would be number of transactions?  Yet, this is roughly the same as 12 months ago
https://blockchain.info/charts/n-transactions

The number of wallets has risen
https://blockchain.info/charts/my-wallet-n-users
but that doesn't mean they have anything in them.

And the number of transactions those wallets make has only recently started being measured but is going down since then
https://blockchain.info/charts/my-wallet-n-tx

You are ignoring the evidence that bitcoin adoption is still increasing, which makes a comparison with silver invalid.

One thing I've learned is don't be in a rush to buy bottoms that come after big bubbles, because there will be many bull traps.

Since no one answered, I took a moment to look at the long-term BTC chart with volume turned off:

http://bitcoincharts.com/charts/bitstampUSD

And the 2000-2014 silver chart:

http://www.kitco.com/scripts/hist_charts/yearly_graphs.plx

I see a correlation wherein the mini-bubble 2008 crash of silver V bottomed, but the much grander bubble of the 2011 made two spike bounces off of $26ish, then on the third time down it crashed through to $18 which is below the prior high of the 2008 peak at $21 (and lately it has made two V bull traps and I bet preparing to go lower than $18 because the dollar will be getting very strong as Fed tapers and capital runs from emerging markets to dollar in a virtuous, symbiotic upward spiral).

We see the same with BTC comparing the 2013 crash from $270 to $50 where it basically V bottomed up to $170, then U bottomed at $70 going into the bubble later in 2013. This second bubble has spiked twice off of $400.

So folks, my bet the bottom is going to be below $270.

The reasons I think it is valid to compare these two markets is because:

• Both tiny market caps.
• Both more or less the same white male retail investors who hate central banking.
• Similar psychology of an irrational expectation, with silver based on expectation of hyperinflation and BTC on it becoming a currency.
• Similar media amplification between crashes leading to more greater fools on the second one.
• "It is different this time, this is unique so don't apply usual market analysis".

I don't know what probability to access to my expectation. I will think about it perhaps. Certainly correlation doesn't prove anything and this is not a certain outcome. Just sharing.

Im first to admit that there is wisdom in the Bible. we can all learn from it (and we could alternatively teach our-selves) but there is no way you will have me believe anything that would define me as a christian. I simply don't have a choice, because I have seen with my own eyes since I was young.

Its even later, and I'm still not in bed. I like what the bible says about a lot of stuff, its unfortunate that the church has had 2000 years to co-opt its message to their own ends I generalise though. I'm sure that, as ever, it's the few spoiling it for the many.

I think you are probably right there are plenty who miss the message of christianity as a result of them being so determined not to be a christian. That's a shame, because its not a terrible springboard to from which to develop a good morale foundation. With a few tweaks here and there to bring it into the 20th century!

sgbett I agree entirely. We have the same philosophy. The masses should be free to enslave themselves. I want a way we can opt-out (and opt-in to the free market) as an alternative option of joining the power trippers who capture the authority.

My frustration should be only when I think discussion has turned from debate of falsifiable statements into reputation battles. I prefer not to entirely opt-out of all discussion.

I agree with you when people use religion to deny reality. Religion can also be a form of mind control, i.e. propaganda. However you might not agree with the following. The Bible also seems to be all about respecting property rights and avoidance of idoling collectives. Even Jesus said don't pray in church rather in your closet (Matthew 6:5). It seems the problem is people conflating wisdom and religion. The Bible is about the former in my opinion and speaks against religion, but many or most interpret it other ways, e.g. as a crusade to browbeat and look down on others. And atheists are so frustrated with that, they've closed their mind to the wisdom therein. Both ridicule each other, but the atheists I think do it with more venom lately (e.g. "is Dumbo the Flying Elephant your creator"), although let's not forget the brutality of the Inquisition. I have no problem with atheists nor Christians (Muslims, Hindus, Buddhists, Taoists, etc), for as long as they don't stomp on diversity nor be overly judgmental. Jesus said he hung out with the sinners because that is where the most benefit could be attained. There is no perfect. We are all different so the ecosystem can anneal to diverse scenarios which are ongoing simultaneously.

And isn't it neat that we are all different. Always something new to meet and experience.

(I don't want to get into the woman's rights issues that revolve around Muslims, etc, as it is more complex discussion that I don't have time for right now. Just suffice it to say I am all for both men and woman being happy and excelling, but science and actual measured performance also informs us that the genders are not equally suited to all the same things and remember I want both genders to be happy and excel, not fail because we expect them to be the same. There is much discussion of this here, such as how feminism is really a way to be economically privileged, i.e. towards totalitarianism.)

I lose my shit sometimes too. I hope if people call me out I can be so level headed.

I understand the frustration with those who can't see the 'prison'. I think one of the contributory factors to people desiring to be governed, is that it allows you to absolve yourself of personal responsibility. Blame the government! It's their fault I am poor! I see this is being similar to how people use religion as a means of accepting the world. God's will can help you deal with a lot of crap, all you need is faith. Two sides of the same coin, essentially being able to ascribe any action to a higher power, and thus not have to face cold hard reality.

I have a bit of an anti authoritarian bent. This can lead me to thinking all authority is corrupt to the core though, and so I have to be careful not to be seduced by that. I need to try and temper that view and accept that some is good some is bad. The people that (mis)wield the power are the ones to blame, not the concept of power, and hierarchy itself. Maybe. I dunno.

I'm not against religion, nor am I against people who wish to remain comfortably numb, jacked into the matrix. I'm one of those not very fashionable libertarian sorts, people should be free to do whatever they wanna do type stuff. I don't think that runs contrary to your ideas of a truly free market based society. Indeed as I understand it the concept of property is a pretty big deal, ownership of self etc and by extension the freedom to own other things etc

I'm probably rambling a bit now, its late. As for BTC, this better be the bottom, cos my prediction of a few weeks ago is looking crapper by the minute

On the forum the bearish topics can tell we are close to the bottom

but... WHERE is the volume


The TA screams 400-410 with a nice triple bottom, so everyone is ready to buy at this level...
BUT you know the market always go in the worst direction.


So I see 3 options :
- we already passed the bottom (but the volume???)
- after this little bull trap, another test of 420s-430s, and here we go
- between 350 and 390 (big volume : lot of people panicking because <400)


difficult to predict 

Thermite for the upper floors. Nukes for the lower floors and basement.





Time to buy more BTCs.
I'm amazed of your timing precision, Risto. We are now just where you have been saying from January:

Question: Will it be a U or V bottom, i.e. will the bottom be there only for a very short duration or will it slowly rise off the bottom?

What did it do last time?

sgbett, perhaps we may find we agree more than we both realized on our initial exchange.

I don't view this as one aristocratic lineage in control. There is much competition and failure amongst those who vie to capture the power vacuum of democracy. And they may fail entirely during epochs, e.g. the Dark Age returned it to feudalism so warlords had more power than Kings.

Rather I think the NWO is the natural evolutionary outcome of human desire for collective governance. This power vacuum of democracy forces centralization of power.

I covered this process in more detail (made an analogy to organisms in a Petri dish) in my essay which CoinCube referred to in his Economic Devastation thread:


In any case, this is why I am trying to eliminate (or reduce is more realistic) the ability of society to tax. I think that is the only way to break free from that power vacuum and arrive at a society based on free market competition.

There is much fear and misunderstanding from readers who think this would be worse. For example they conflate crony capitalism with the free market, etc..

This is all covered in great detail in my past writings on this forum. And I don't have time to repeat the discussion again.

Hope that helps our misunderstanding and apologies for losing my cuth upthread.

I am hoping CoinCube will write a book on all this, because I am obviously not patient and articulate enough to prevent misunderstandings.

P.S. perhaps you can detect from my writings today, I am not feeling ill today. Happy productive day and I can concentrate.


Add: I forgot to insert this motivation in one of my posts today. If we become wealthy, we can avoid the terrorism tsuris when we travel. A free market is developing to serve us.

I didn't say they were impotent. They are rich and powerful, ergo they can do some pretty serious shit. What I'm arguing specifically is there isn't a glitzy NWO. There is more likely just a bunch of disperate individuals, groups. I don't think that the perpetrators of each atrocity are singing from the same hymn sheet.


My eyes are open to these things, I understand your (albeit somewhat sensational) point about people being slaves to the system. I just don't feel like I am so prescient as to able to draw such unwavering conclusions. I'm not sure knowing the absolute truth of it helps. It's more important to me to just know that this stuff goes on, so that I can try to and play the hand I've been dealt the best I can.

Perhaps you are right, perhaps there is one family to rule them all, but it just seems a little improbable to me. This does not mean I don't agree that bad people are doing bad stuff everywhere.

There are percentages (not all) who overextended or lose confidence. This is human psychology in all markets.

Also there are those who think they can get back in at a lower price and lower their average basis. Like playing chicken, who will blink first and last.