Topic: Wall Observer BTC/USD - Bitcoin price movement tracking & discussion - page 28170. (Read 26710696 times)

Explanation

In my understanding, a trade happens at price X when the seller thinks that X is a bit too high, and the buyer thinks that X is a bit too low.

During periods when the sentiment of all buyers and all sellers about the item's value is unchanging, trading quickly stops and the market price remains mostly constant.

Conversely, when something causes the general sentiment to change, the market price changes, and volume usually increases -- because each trader usually changes his evaluation by a different amount and at a different time, so the above condition is often satisfied, possibly more than once for the same pair of traders.  (If all the traders changed their perceptions in perfect synchronism, the implicit market price -- that is, the midpoint of the ask/bid spread -- would change without any trades.)

If these premises are correct, then what is happening now at Huobi?  For the last 4 hours, I see quite substantial volume (~5kBTC/hour), but the price just wanders in the narrow range between 3230 and 3280 yuan, about 4 dollars up or down from the midpoint.

What is going on in the heads of those traders?  Why can't they find the equilibrium?  Their perceptions could not be changing constantly like that, up and down by a few dollars, at random.  Are their robots locked in a bogus feedback loop, each endlessly over-reacting to the small over-reactions of the other robots?

On a runup on super low volume.

Are you watching volume of the last 3 runups? Decreasing dramatically.

How far do you think we go before correcting downward? The market just went up 47% in a few days.

No rest until 1000?

third time bounce. this is a bullish wedge 

The problem I see with you entering the forex market besides not being able to see volume is that you will basically have to guess what future central bank liquidity decisions are and attempt to front run them. It's the ultimate rigged market.

 

You're an idiot

Play a record

Not quite. i've been shorting since selling at 900, and it's been an enjoyable ride.

However, i dont plan on missing the next space shuttle either.  

Financially Transmitted Disease is a thing now? I'm guessing marriage and Amway are in the diagnostic manual?

I think there was a covert bear mission to jump onto a moving train and detach the engine. Now all the bitcoiners are unknowingly stuck in cars that are just drifting down the track. But they don't know because they're busy with champagne and disco lights.

Exactly the way I feel. My last short position failed to fill at 527, even though that was exactly the high. That last runup on Houbi to the resistance line was on very very low volume compared the other runups.

Maybe we have more in the tank. Maybe we go to the exponential trendline. But this doesn't feel like a bottom to me. This feels like a bunch of traders riding the wave on an appearance of a bottom.

I don't think we just break down to new intermediate lows (340) and then recover on low volume. I'm betting I make a profit on this trade. If not and it goes to 600+ then I'll just take the hit.

Wow, what a day. All my shorts up to 520 filled, but i cant say im feeling comfy.
Still hard to believe that this is it, the turnaround we've been waiting for on such anemic volume. I'll take a hit at around 600 and rebuy.

Let's not exaggerate.  Bitcoin may be a terrible disease, and spreading it intentionally may be a heinous crime; but I don't think it can be compared to genocide.

best to do it while the price is falling tho.

People here accuse me of saying 'the end of bitcoin' all the time so I might as well start actually doing it.

Explanation

??

the end of bitcoin

Violence is inevitable, but the sanction against initiating violence is what differentiates the civilized from barbarians and savages. The State is the one great exception we make for no clear reason except that's what we've always had. There will always be leaders and followers, but there need not be rulers.  Even if there are rulers, rulers with small domains are less harmful than rulers with large domains.

I think civilization is inevitably going to revert back to city states simply because they are more efficient and technology is making large populations ungovernable. I think it will be a long process but ultimately a step in the right direction. I have very little faith in academics because they suffer almost no consequences for their bad ideas.

Hosting provider account ran dry again. Plans afoot to try and cut costs but if anyone feels like sponsoring...