Topic: rpietila Wall Observer - the Quality TA Thread ;) - page 280. (Read 907212 times)

Tainted might be to nice a word for what's going on, we're talking faked numbers that are off by multiple factors of 10. I'd like to know where the current 10% CNY BTC-marketshare numbers are coming from, because if you can divide that number through 10 then what remains of the total volume then?

I'm starting to believe that the Chinese stake in the bitcoinmarket has been severely overestimated and even more damaging than the whole m-t-Gox fiasco.  It might indeed be advisable to just scrap the Chinese exchanges from all charts until it can be proven that they are trustworthy enough to be listed. It's one thing if it's a local joke that a few Chinese are into, but I don't see why the rest of the world should play along with that little game then.

This information is so important that I don't think you need to go so verbal against somebody who is seeking the truth, but is just not as far as you in the quest.

Perhaps it is helpful if I share that it took me about 5 years of almost full-time study to de-educate myself from the predominant mindset to something I consider a clean mind. I am only now able to start learning anything. I still get irritated by the undescribable evils that the depopulationists force on us in name of "welfare" and whatnot, and the feeble response of the governed, who do not understand anything, like you said. But attacking people seldom helps. Unless you are searching the very gems, who only thrive when insulted. But if that is the case, do it in your own thread.

Breaking News! Smoking gun! Eyewitness account released by well known Jim Rickards (former intelligence agent turned analyst and author of best seller, Currency Wars) who was in the room when the CIA was doing the insider trading on option puts against the two airlines involved in 9/11. Corroborated by Max Keiser who was talking to Cantor Fitzgerald brokers who told him they were betting short against bombings and airplane attacks imminent on New York.

So STFU mofo! You dumb ass white boy slave.

You've had all these prior examples of false-flags, e.g. Pearl Harbor, Reichstag fire, etc. and you see the clear motivation for 9/11 was the Patriot Act and subsequent executive orders and laws that have created all seeing police and tax slavery state exposed by Edward Snowden. Yet you still want to believe your white world isn't so corrupt as it is. You want to live in your fantasy bubble.

The only thing you might understand is "Mooo. Mooo".

Arrogance? No. Just don't want to join dumb ass fools. I prefer humble, but am I supposed to just fall into the queue with you chattel.

It has nothing to do with lapping up my word. It has to do with you being too lazy to actually research. If you did the research, you would understand why it is physically impossible for the steel buildings to entirely collapse from fire and debris. Add to that free fall velocity of collapse, meaning no resistance. The only way for WTC7 to collapse the way it did was demolition. And if you are not an engineer then maybe you don't understand that, but we engineers understand why. And yes in fact the building was evacuated several times for long periods leading up to this. And in fact there were dozens of workers in the elevator shafts of the twin towers (where the structural steel beams were) for many weeks leading up to the demolitions. If you did some research and capable of understanding engineering and science, then you would know this.

This is another example of what I was explaining upthread (about Bitcoin's white male nerd demographic) wherein we can be separated from the masses who will never be able to comprehend the engineering about 9/11 and so will believe the government's impossible concocted whitewash (or in Bitcoin's case masses are not adopting, only white males against central banking are). We see the same ignorance of science or facts mechanism in play with all the current things white people are fooled into fighting for (to do what the elite want), e.g. Bitcoin, man-made climate change, discrimination, feminism, environment, etc.. The elite lull you into your comfort zone where you can be manipulated with emotional propaganda, e.g. "save those cute polar bears or cute little African kids".


We natives refuse to be slaves (I am % Cherokee) and I see the same daily here in the Philippines, they refuse to obey laws (and that is why I love living here). Some white people (or all except for those who adjust) hate it here because no one follows the rules. They complain incessantly and everyone just leaves the room and lets them blabber to themselves. It is quite hilarious to see the white control freaks go into a livid hissy fit (reminds me of a child whining on the floor of Toys-R-Us about a toy) because the hotel staff refuses to listen to their tirade, wherein the staff escapes to and is giggling in the back office. Here you have no law support to tell your neighbor to stop blasting their karaoke all night for days and weeks. Instead if you want peace, you better buy a large enough area of land. And that is a free market. No big brother to hold your feeble hand.

Even if you think you've enslaved a filipino, they will be doing what ever they damn well please when you turn your head. They live for the moment, so it is very difficult to change their motivation to what you want them to do. Of course I also have white traits in me, such as planning for the future. So it is interesting how I try to balance the two cultures that inhabit myself.

And those armchair sociologists who accuse of me of being racist are equivalently insane. Should I be racist against white or brown people when I am both? Nonsense.

I think this is a good point.  Data providers should be advised of it.  Bitcoinwisdom, bitcoincharts, bitcoinity, etc.  The case is something like this:

(1) Once, it was important to add Chinese data, because it was a large and growing free market.

(2) The facts have changed, and like Mt.Gox before them, the Chinese markets are no longer free, nor growing.

(3) The Chinese data is now tainted.  Propagating it hurts the Bitcoin economy and the users of your service.

I was wondering if Bobby Lee is correct about how the average Chinese exchange operates, and his observations do seem to be valid explanations of odd marketreactions in China, how can you still make any kind of usable market prediction considering all that fraud. To name a few, he lists, exchanges padding volumes with zeros, selling to itself, repeating past sales to hide low activity and phantom liquidity (via fake buy and sell orders that cause flash crashes when someones marketorder falls right through them), add to that zero fees and you've got a rather explosive mix, that's more destructive than helpful to the market.

If you consider this, then I'm having a real hard time seeing what is supposed to be so bad about the news that China is banning exchanges. If what Bobby says is even a little true, then the ban can't come soon enough in my opinion, in the mean time it might be a good idea for the market to completely disregard any market prices from China, because it looks like they do not have even remotely the marketshare or volume that everyone seems to believe they have and therefore should not have the same impact on marketprice either.

I also contribute my share to tangents, as I am sure you have noticed.


I do not take your point as granted, however.  Consider:  If they wanted to ban BTC they would simply ban BTC.  They want to keep it around, but contained.  Containers leak.  After the situation stabilizes, and becomes well-understood, so that risks are not feared, and corrupt cadres know how to use BTC to expatriate their dirty money, then they will do it.  That may take a while, but it is still a sizable future upside.  I mention this demographic because the funds are concentrated and BTC is natural fit, and it does not depend on even tacit state approval.  There are certainly many others.


The geographic question is your focus.  Certainly Argentina, Venezuela, Vietnam, Russia, India, Pakistan, Switzerland, Luxembourg, Singapore, Macau, Hong Kong have use cases driven by their peculiar economic and cultural  conditions.  I have no special insight into any of these cases, but I would observe that any one of them can release a proportionately sized flood of fiat into BTC at any time, and one or more probably will, given enough time.  They key factor regarding movement of concentrated wealth is perception of risk.  BTC is probably too small yet for large-scale laundering.  I could see laundering 20, maybe 50 or even conceivably 100 millions, perhaps, but not billions, in a given year, if I were responsible for laundering funds.  I could see storing up to perhaps 50 bp of BTC market float in crypto -- say 20 million -- if it were part of a diversified concealment strategy.  These are limits imposed by the medium.  Limits appropriate to a use-case will vary with the parameters of the use case.


There is plenty of money.  Central banks are running their Heidelberg 9000's at full tilt, 24x7.  It's just not going into exchange-traded BTC right now.  That's not terribly surprising right?  We just blew off a hype cycle.  

Most of the money going into BTC for the foreseeable future will be stealth money or grass-roots nickel & dime, which is important only in aggregate, and not so easy to track.  It shows up more in the block chain and less on the exchange. It flows in gradually.  Exchange prices will react, either in a diffusive tide or in a discrete reactive jump, at some point.  We would like to know when, but it is challenging to model.

Institutional money is easier to track.  You can check out the second market BIT observer thread.  Some fund managers occasionally mention personal stakes on CNBC or Bloomberg or WSJ media.  Most will not mention it because fund managers typically prefer a very conservative image.  Some smaller funds are paid to be aggressive, but they are usually also stealthy.

My "zero evidence" comment was foolish rhetoric, for which I apologize.  Such hyperbole rarely if ever adds clarity to a discussion, and in this case was a short-sighted self-sabotage.  

In fact there is an abundance of evidence.  The question at hand is how it should be correctly interpreted.  My position is that the least absurdity in the interpretation of the physical evidence is found in the interpretation which places the conspiracy within a center of military-intelligence-industrial power, among the beneficiaries of the crime, who were consequently relieved of responsibility for the misplacement of 2.3 trillion USD of public funds, rather than in a cave in Afghanistan supposedly motivated by "hatred for our freedom", among those who suffered death as a result of the crime, thus losing their control of central Asian petroleum pipelines.

Visible buckling of the structure is characteristic of a wide variety of failure modes, all of which involve heat generation, which always involves thermal expansion.  A wide range of studies have arrived at contradictory conclusions, and none should be cherry-picked to support a preferred view.  Some of the structural studies I have seen assumed their conclusions from the inception.  This is how one insures that one arrives at the desired conclusion, after all.  I can tell you that studies have shown that vaccines cause epidemic autism, but that should not be persuasive to you.  I can provide studies which are purported to provide conclusive physical evidence of pre-planned demolition.  I imagine you are aware of at least a few yourself.  The fact is that we do not have the time, or the place, here and now, to adequately address the vast and complex body of evidence.  The NIST study is poor, and unreliable.  NIST engineers resigned in disgust.  I can see why.

I respect your method of discourse.  I do not respect the conclusions which you appear to be intending, because of my peculiar history of investigation into the question.  It may be that the evidence available to you well justifies your conclusion.  For me, it would be an act of moral cowardice and intellectual dishonesty not to raise ready objections to that supposed conclusion.  Most people will never have the opportunity or motivation to form an opinion, and most who do will do so on a rash and shallow basis, sadly.  I once considered the case for my interpretation to be slam-dunk.  Today my recollection of the specific points of evidence and the chain of reasoning which dunked that ball is stale, and time-consuming to reference.  I must yield the field in preference to other fronts of advance.

I only know what Wikipedia and its sources refer, but there is certainly evidence: Visible buckling of the structure, and the study showed a key girder came out of its place because of thermal expansion. Given that every steel frame tower is different, and that I have not studied every steel frame tower fire in history, unlike what you seem to imply you have done, I don't have any problem with that explanation.

EDIT: And the Windsor Tower was reinforced concrete, I reckon shouldn't have brought into the discussion.

Thanks for trying to drag us back on topic

My point is China is a market that is being strangled -- the percentages are irrelevant, 99% of nothing if the 'wise old men' ban BTC (and lets face reality, it seems they want to do so) -- so where are the new funds coming from?

India?  South America?

It seems the only place investment is coming from are 'Western' countries, where BTC currently is a couple of steps up from time share and life insurance in terms of public perception.  We can talk about adoption curves, trend lines, Metcalf's Law, Kondratief Waves and all the rest....its makes great copy but...brass tacks now

...show me the money!

very off-topic, but wow I totally agree with this.  A year ago I thought 9/11 inside job truthers were totally nuts, but alex jones woke me up! Now I am consumed with how to wake up others- there is a battle on for our minds.   We really need to move this into another thread though!

China is still a new market. Penetration is less than 0.003%.  99.997% upside remains.

Ahahaha,thanks, fast and reliable conclusion, great argument.... This is by far the dumbest i have heard in a long time, wow.
I´m almost speechless. So if the CIA invented the term conspiracy, then every so called "theory" is in fact true i guess, nice logic? 0+0=1
Every critic about a so called conspiracy theory is ultimately the result of a brainwashed person or even worse, it´s from a person who belongs to THEM!!(NWO, Bitcoin Foundation....)
If i can´t proove that Kennedy wasn´t killed by a talking green horse it might as well be as true as every other explanation!


Excuse me, but i´m a brainwashed sheep.
BUT IT´S NOT MY FAULT THAT THE REPTILIANS TOOK CONTROL OVER ME. I HAVE TO OBEY !  

Not true: only the wtc7 case is different.  All other cases are the same.  No other steel frame tower in history has ever collapsed due to fire.  Extraordinary claims.... zero evidence.

J Edgar Hoover used the term to describe inquiries into the existence of the mafia before that.

The u.s. government disputes this.  People died in the collapse.  It takes literally weeks of planning and charge placement work to demolish a building of that size.  What can you conclude about wikipedia?

I agree, the bottom does not occur when most people stop believing in bitcoin future but rather when most people sell off just because they belive they will able to buy in again at a cheaper price. We saw this in July 2013. Although I generally like trading in bear trends, I've made an active choise not to trade during this trend anymore (unless something really obvious happens), due to the fact that people's attitude is beginning to align with this scenario. Kudos to those of you that have balls to trade at this stage!

Despite the error of the last prediction that 500 wouldn't be broken (although it fits well with the scenario you predicted before about a big spike down at the end of March   ), I have to give you credit for your predictions latley Risto! They have been pretty much spot on.

I also agree that Bitcoins value is based on the usage of the Bitcoin. Just like any technology/product where the usage of the product gives the product its value (rather than a product where the product itself defines the value, a simple example would of course be any social media like Facebook, or an invention like the telephone), the value of the Bitcoin will grow as long as the adoption continues.

You complete the picture you just painted Fonzie

Bitcoin cultists, conspiracy theories, religion?  Is this the quality TA Thread or did i knock at the wrong door?

LMAO  

Equally well spoken. (probably more so)

I am not christian, nor particularly religious in the omniscient being sense of the world. Though in line with my thinking on everything else: who can possibly know.

I know love is the most important thing though. Sometimes I get it right, sometimes I get it wrong. Just gotta keep trying.

Very well spoken.