I'm catching up here. Is this what happened?
We were going up, someone spread some fake info, the sheep panic sold, info turns out to be fake, price stays down. Correct?
Topic: Wall Observer BTC/USD - Bitcoin price movement tracking & discussion - page 28717. (Read 26707059 times)
March 27, 2014, 12:04:57 AM
March 26, 2014, 11:52:39 PM
I would like to explain the effects of good news vs bad news on the price of bitcoin (how it may convince people to buy or sell or hold):
I will refer to Joseph T. Klapper, who in 1960 wrote of the limited effects model of the media: the media do not have predictable effects. The effects of the media are small and unpredictable. The reception of a message depends on the source (credibility) and topic (preexisting opinion) of a message. The role of the media is to reinforce existing opinions. Confirmation bias. The media are more likely to reinforce opinions than to change them. Political campaigns and ad campaigns will typically find their way to those who are already among the converted.
Think about this carefully when interpreting the effects of news, good or bad.
It's also important to note that although belief in the limited effects theory later declined, to a perspective that the media did have a strong effect, but more nuanced and subtle and difficult to gauge, the general rules about the effects of media on the public still hold true. We consider ourselves opinion leaders, and this being a bull forum, might influence our decisions more than we might care to admit.
“The effort to state an absolute fact is simply an attempt to achieve what is humanly impossible.” “All I can do is give you my interpretation of the facts.” - Ivy Lee
I will refer to Joseph T. Klapper, who in 1960 wrote of the limited effects model of the media: the media do not have predictable effects. The effects of the media are small and unpredictable. The reception of a message depends on the source (credibility) and topic (preexisting opinion) of a message. The role of the media is to reinforce existing opinions. Confirmation bias. The media are more likely to reinforce opinions than to change them. Political campaigns and ad campaigns will typically find their way to those who are already among the converted.
Think about this carefully when interpreting the effects of news, good or bad.
It's also important to note that although belief in the limited effects theory later declined, to a perspective that the media did have a strong effect, but more nuanced and subtle and difficult to gauge, the general rules about the effects of media on the public still hold true. We consider ourselves opinion leaders, and this being a bull forum, might influence our decisions more than we might care to admit.
“The effort to state an absolute fact is simply an attempt to achieve what is humanly impossible.” “All I can do is give you my interpretation of the facts.” - Ivy Lee
If I understand your point, you're saying that this China news only had any effect on the market because mass sentiment is that Bitcoin is vulnerable and this news served to confirm that sentiment?
While that may be true in many cases, this one would have meant a mass sell off of a very large percentage of international exchange funds. In light of that fact, the drop was actually pretty minor and insignificant.
Edit: assuming the drop is over since the news has been debunked.
Sure. I probably should have mentioned the role of the id as well though. We are irrational creatures, and are affected more by emotion than rational information, regardless of what we'd like to believe.
This irrationality is also the main reason, if I can use that word, why I am HODLING.
I must admit there is a lot of passion and belief in holding BTC long term but you rationalise it not to stop being true to your passion
Most successful human traders and all trading posts are mainly taking rational decisions though
March 26, 2014, 11:49:04 PM
Really? Let's see, more or less likely to sell them if they are given 3 weeks notice to remove them from exchanges... more, or less? likely? It is a difficult one, I know.
Are you saying that it is obvious they would remove coins from the exchanges to bitcoin wallets, or obvious that they would sell every coin in their possession and remove yuan?
Is it also obvious to you how many coins are actually held by the Chinese?
March 26, 2014, 11:40:19 PM
I would like to explain the effects of good news vs bad news on the price of bitcoin (how it may convince people to buy or sell or hold):
I will refer to Joseph T. Klapper, who in 1960 wrote of the limited effects model of the media: the media do not have predictable effects. The effects of the media are small and unpredictable. The reception of a message depends on the source (credibility) and topic (preexisting opinion) of a message. The role of the media is to reinforce existing opinions. Confirmation bias. The media are more likely to reinforce opinions than to change them. Political campaigns and ad campaigns will typically find their way to those who are already among the converted.
Think about this carefully when interpreting the effects of news, good or bad.
It's also important to note that although belief in the limited effects theory later declined, to a perspective that the media did have a strong effect, but more nuanced and subtle and difficult to gauge, the general rules about the effects of media on the public still hold true. We consider ourselves opinion leaders, and this being a bull forum, might influence our decisions more than we might care to admit.
“The effort to state an absolute fact is simply an attempt to achieve what is humanly impossible.” “All I can do is give you my interpretation of the facts.” - Ivy Lee
I will refer to Joseph T. Klapper, who in 1960 wrote of the limited effects model of the media: the media do not have predictable effects. The effects of the media are small and unpredictable. The reception of a message depends on the source (credibility) and topic (preexisting opinion) of a message. The role of the media is to reinforce existing opinions. Confirmation bias. The media are more likely to reinforce opinions than to change them. Political campaigns and ad campaigns will typically find their way to those who are already among the converted.
Think about this carefully when interpreting the effects of news, good or bad.
It's also important to note that although belief in the limited effects theory later declined, to a perspective that the media did have a strong effect, but more nuanced and subtle and difficult to gauge, the general rules about the effects of media on the public still hold true. We consider ourselves opinion leaders, and this being a bull forum, might influence our decisions more than we might care to admit.
“The effort to state an absolute fact is simply an attempt to achieve what is humanly impossible.” “All I can do is give you my interpretation of the facts.” - Ivy Lee
If I understand your point, you're saying that this China news only had any effect on the market because mass sentiment is that Bitcoin is vulnerable and this news served to confirm that sentiment?
While that may be true in many cases, this one would have meant a mass sell off of a very large percentage of international exchange funds. In light of that fact, the drop was actually pretty minor and insignificant.
Edit: assuming the drop is over since the news has been debunked.
Sure. I probably should have mentioned the role of the id as well though. We are irrational creatures, and are affected more by emotion than rational information, regardless of what we'd like to believe.
This irrationality is also the main reason, if I can use that word, why I am HODLING.
March 26, 2014, 11:37:26 PM
If I understand your point, you're saying that this China news only had any effect on the market because mass sentiment is that Bitcoin is vulnerable and this news served to confirm that sentiment?
While that may be true in many cases, this one would have meant a mass sell off of a very large percentage of international exchange funds. In light of that fact, the drop was actually pretty minor and insignificant.
While that may be true in many cases, this one would have meant a mass sell off of a very large percentage of international exchange funds. In light of that fact, the drop was actually pretty minor and insignificant.
Isn't your bolded text the very essence of the myth?
Personally, I don't know how many coins are actually held by the "chinese" and I also don't know whether they would be more or less likely to sell them in a "ban" scenario.
Really? Let's see, more or less likely to sell them if they are given 3 weeks notice to remove them from exchanges... more, or less? likely? It is a difficult one, I know.
March 26, 2014, 11:36:49 PM
Also, I seem to recall you having a go at Jorge in the past for using anecdotal evidence, while your friends prove a rule. Perhaps we can see a link to the Real Estate company that is openly selling leases for BTC?
That's a fair comment, but observe that Jorge asserted a categorical rule, rather than a trend. Also for clarity I should say that the transaction was nominally in CNY although the payment was in BTC at Huobi instantaneous rates. Like myself, the friend in question is scrupulously observant of local laws and customs to the degree possible. My Chinese is intermediate at best, but his is fluent, and he is 华人。
March 26, 2014, 11:36:06 PM
Someone is tryin to use the small upwards momentum to unload a few packages of 500 BTC.
MARK can you hear me?
MARK can you hear me?
March 26, 2014, 11:30:10 PM
If I understand your point, you're saying that this China news only had any effect on the market because mass sentiment is that Bitcoin is vulnerable and this news served to confirm that sentiment?
While that may be true in many cases, this one would have meant a mass sell off of a very large percentage of international exchange funds. In light of that fact, the drop was actually pretty minor and insignificant.
While that may be true in many cases, this one would have meant a mass sell off of a very large percentage of international exchange funds. In light of that fact, the drop was actually pretty minor and insignificant.
Isn't your bolded text the very essence of the myth?
Personally, I don't know how many coins are actually held by the "chinese" and I also don't know whether they would be more or less likely to sell them in a "ban" scenario.
March 26, 2014, 11:25:51 PM
It seems that every day you reveal ever more disregard for reality and honesty in pursuit of your hostile agenda. I don't know how you can respect yourself.
No need to take it out on me. Price will recover today, you'll see. 3628 CNY on Huobi, 593 USD on Bitstamp, by 19:30 UTC. March 26, 2014, 11:20:50 PM
I would like to explain the effects of good news vs bad news on the price of bitcoin (how it may convince people to buy or sell or hold):
I will refer to Joseph T. Klapper, who in 1960 wrote of the limited effects model of the media: the media do not have predictable effects. The effects of the media are small and unpredictable. The reception of a message depends on the source (credibility) and topic (preexisting opinion) of a message. The role of the media is to reinforce existing opinions. Confirmation bias. The media are more likely to reinforce opinions than to change them. Political campaigns and ad campaigns will typically find their way to those who are already among the converted.
Think about this carefully when interpreting the effects of news, good or bad.
It's also important to note that although belief in the limited effects theory later declined, to a perspective that the media did have a strong effect, but more nuanced and subtle and difficult to gauge, the general rules about the effects of media on the public still hold true. We consider ourselves opinion leaders, and this being a bull forum, might influence our decisions more than we might care to admit.
“The effort to state an absolute fact is simply an attempt to achieve what is humanly impossible.” “All I can do is give you my interpretation of the facts.” - Ivy Lee
I will refer to Joseph T. Klapper, who in 1960 wrote of the limited effects model of the media: the media do not have predictable effects. The effects of the media are small and unpredictable. The reception of a message depends on the source (credibility) and topic (preexisting opinion) of a message. The role of the media is to reinforce existing opinions. Confirmation bias. The media are more likely to reinforce opinions than to change them. Political campaigns and ad campaigns will typically find their way to those who are already among the converted.
Think about this carefully when interpreting the effects of news, good or bad.
It's also important to note that although belief in the limited effects theory later declined, to a perspective that the media did have a strong effect, but more nuanced and subtle and difficult to gauge, the general rules about the effects of media on the public still hold true. We consider ourselves opinion leaders, and this being a bull forum, might influence our decisions more than we might care to admit.
“The effort to state an absolute fact is simply an attempt to achieve what is humanly impossible.” “All I can do is give you my interpretation of the facts.” - Ivy Lee
If I understand your point, you're saying that this China news only had any effect on the market because mass sentiment is that Bitcoin is vulnerable and this news served to confirm that sentiment?
While that may be true in many cases, this one would have meant a mass sell off of a very large percentage of international exchange funds. In light of that fact, the drop was actually pretty minor and insignificant.
Edit: assuming the drop is over since the news has been debunked.
March 26, 2014, 11:15:20 PM
I would like to explain the effects of good news vs bad news on the price of bitcoin (how it may convince people to buy or sell or hold):
I will refer to Joseph T. Klapper, who in 1960 wrote of the limited effects model of the media: the media do not have predictable effects. The effects of the media are small and unpredictable. The reception of a message depends on the source (credibility) and topic (preexisting opinion) of a message. The role of the media is to reinforce existing opinions. Confirmation bias. The media are more likely to reinforce opinions than to change them. Political campaigns and ad campaigns will typically find their way to those who are already among the converted.
Think about this carefully when interpreting the effects of news, good or bad.
It's also important to note that although belief in the limited effects theory later declined, to a perspective that the media did have a strong effect, but more nuanced and subtle and difficult to gauge, the general rules about the effects of media on the public still hold true. We consider ourselves opinion leaders, and this being a bull forum, might influence our decisions more than we might care to admit.
“The effort to state an absolute fact is simply an attempt to achieve what is humanly impossible.” “All I can do is give you my interpretation of the facts.” - Ivy Lee
I will refer to Joseph T. Klapper, who in 1960 wrote of the limited effects model of the media: the media do not have predictable effects. The effects of the media are small and unpredictable. The reception of a message depends on the source (credibility) and topic (preexisting opinion) of a message. The role of the media is to reinforce existing opinions. Confirmation bias. The media are more likely to reinforce opinions than to change them. Political campaigns and ad campaigns will typically find their way to those who are already among the converted.
Think about this carefully when interpreting the effects of news, good or bad.
It's also important to note that although belief in the limited effects theory later declined, to a perspective that the media did have a strong effect, but more nuanced and subtle and difficult to gauge, the general rules about the effects of media on the public still hold true. We consider ourselves opinion leaders, and this being a bull forum, might influence our decisions more than we might care to admit.
“The effort to state an absolute fact is simply an attempt to achieve what is humanly impossible.” “All I can do is give you my interpretation of the facts.” - Ivy Lee
March 26, 2014, 11:05:46 PM
so if china "orders all bitcoin third party accounts to be closed" then the effect might be bitcoin withdrawals? if you dont want to mess around with fiat, just buy bitcoin and get out right?
Bitcoins would be useless to most Chinese, I believe, They already cannot use them for anything except trading.This is categorically untrue. A friend of mine just purchased a house in Shenzhen with bitcoin. More accurately, it was a 99-year lease, nominally.
It seems that every day you reveal ever more disregard for reality and honesty in pursuit of your hostile agenda. I don't know how you can respect yourself.
March 26, 2014, 11:05:05 PM
March 26, 2014, 10:53:30 PM
March 26, 2014, 10:47:33 PM
Groundhog Day pt.5 6 7??
March 26, 2014, 10:44:46 PM
Here's a little reddit repost for you guys:
http://finance.jrj.com.cn/2014/03/27101116938690.shtml[1] In this report, the reporter claimed he called a person in charge of Huobi and BTCTrade CEO, both said they have received no notice from PBOC. Currently, they are doing business as usual.
http://finance.jrj.com.cn/2014/03/27101116938690.shtml[1] In this report, the reporter claimed he called a person in charge of Huobi and BTCTrade CEO, both said they have received no notice from PBOC. Currently, they are doing business as usual.
And we trust bitcoin exchange operators now because exactly why?
Just trying to put a little anti-FUD into the mix. The Huobi price is far more telling.
So far we have:
sketchy website likely full of shit linking to something I can't read - 1
something in Chinese I can't read - 1
Huobi price not plummeting mid-day in China - 100
March 26, 2014, 10:42:11 PM
Here's a little reddit repost for you guys:
http://finance.jrj.com.cn/2014/03/27101116938690.shtml[1] In this report, the reporter claimed he called a person in charge of Huobi and BTCTrade CEO, both said they have received no notice from PBOC. Currently, they are doing business as usual.
http://finance.jrj.com.cn/2014/03/27101116938690.shtml[1] In this report, the reporter claimed he called a person in charge of Huobi and BTCTrade CEO, both said they have received no notice from PBOC. Currently, they are doing business as usual.
Obviously they are going to milk the cash cow to the last drop.
March 26, 2014, 10:41:21 PM
Here's a little reddit repost for you guys:
http://finance.jrj.com.cn/2014/03/27101116938690.shtml[1] In this report, the reporter claimed he called a person in charge of Huobi and BTCTrade CEO, both said they have received no notice from PBOC. Currently, they are doing business as usual.
http://finance.jrj.com.cn/2014/03/27101116938690.shtml[1] In this report, the reporter claimed he called a person in charge of Huobi and BTCTrade CEO, both said they have received no notice from PBOC. Currently, they are doing business as usual.
And we trust bitcoin exchange operators now because exactly why?
March 26, 2014, 10:40:03 PM
Is Leah now reporting from China? 
March 26, 2014, 10:39:30 PM
Here's a little reddit repost for you guys:
http://finance.jrj.com.cn/2014/03/27101116938690.shtml[1] In this report, the reporter claimed he called a person in charge of Huobi and BTCTrade CEO, both said they have received no notice from PBOC. Currently, they are doing business as usual.
http://finance.jrj.com.cn/2014/03/27101116938690.shtml[1] In this report, the reporter claimed he called a person in charge of Huobi and BTCTrade CEO, both said they have received no notice from PBOC. Currently, they are doing business as usual.
Tell me more about how exchange manager tell you always the true
Jump to: