Topic: Wall Observer BTC/USD - Bitcoin price movement tracking & discussion - page 30316. (Read 26709584 times)

The red line (Y) is Bitstamp's hourly closing price from 2014-01-05 to 2014-01-13.

The blue line (X) is generated by starting with

  X(0) = 840
  Z(0) = log_10(X(0)),

then, for i = 1,2,...

  Z(i) = Z(i-1) + 0.058*RND(),
  X(i)  = 10^Z(i)

where RND() is a random number with normal distribution, mean 0 and standard deviation 1.

In simple words, the simulated price X(i) increases or decreases at each step by a random percentage, without regard for the past history.

I had to try twice, with different random generator's seeds; on my first attempt the simulated price dropped too low at one point, it would have been a dead giveaway.

Comcast has been injecting shit into unencrypted web pages since at least 2008.  Not only are they reading the application protocol to do this, they are modifying the data.  And why do you think it is expensive?  They have the data and they have code to read the protocols.  They can trivially extract anything they want that isn't encrypted.

What is the argument or evidence for this?

"Just leave" is a poor solution, especially when I am in one of the most population dense areas in my state.  I probably am moving elsewhere when I finish my degree, but that won't help the millions of people that have no option to but to live with the situation (most people in my state are too poor to even think about moving).  Ultimately lack of population density is the main problem, but at least with common carrier lines there was the possibility of smaller fish focusing on service to clean up the scraps left by the whales.  Without such options, I am currently a scrap that can only access the internet though my phone or by visiting a friend.

These bearish theories are compelling. And I think they provide much needed perspective.

I, however, can't get past one fact however. And that is that there are more millionaires in the world than there will ever be bitcoins. And as more major players get involved there will be more and more coins that never make it to an exchange.

Or put another way, there's not enough bitcoins for 200 more second markets. And Second Market is small small small.

Therefore, unless Bitcoin is greatly rejected by he world, I don't see miners having much of an impact on exchanges quite honestly. Not for a four year bear market.

Honestly, they both look very plausible. In fact I wouldn't be surprised if they're both BTC/USD, but from different exchanges.

Explanation

That is a complex question. Bitcoin = always sodl. Dogecoin = always hodl.

We have to ask Walsoraj. He's the last resort.

WALSORAJ!!!!

What to do? Hodl or sodl?

Too weird for me...selling all my coins.

One of these plots is actual hourly closing price (USD/BTC) from one exchange, the other is a series of fake prices generated by a simple "log-Brownian" model.

Can you tell which is which, without looking at other charts?
If you think you can, what difference do you see?

The unequal distribution of coins can discourage adoption, the result the Bitcoin network has less value, until an optimal distribution equilibrium is reached this bear market will always be a credible probability.

Yes I have been thinking of this too. We are still at the early cycles of bitcoin expansion contraction. In any dynamic where money is ridiculously easy to obtain, participants will multiply: thus the massive jumps in difficulty. I expected a "miner squeeze" when ASIC emerged but I was very wrong. Perhaps such a contraction needed a further run-up and will emerge in the near future.

Explanation

A year. 2 years. 4 years. LOL.

Regarding tax returns, I find it very hard to believe there is any shortage of fiat ready to enter this market.

How long would you guys consider "long-term" be? 

I am bearish, but only for another 2 weeks. At the longest until income tax returns come around. That is when I bought in last year, with my "free money". I suspect some people will do the same this year.

Very important fundamental. Up until now, profit margins have been ridiculously high ever since the first ASICs came out. Obviously, this technological advancement stops soon and will adhere to Moore's law eventually. Only because of the ridiculously high profit margins have miners been able to withhold a large percentage of daily mined coins.

As the profit margins collapse, miners feel the squeeze and are forced to sell more and more not only to cover the initial hardware costs but also electricity, rental etc.

In any other market, miners hedge themselves immediately, but Bitcoin's bubble and compressed technological cycle has created a unique situation in the short term.

Anyone who understands feedback loops will immediately grasp the horrors in my mind. We don't even know much the market could handle; I'm afraid it is very susceptible to changes in supply. Supply drought, supply shock.

Not quite.  Or if so, then in a rather pleasant manner.


But the majority of miners probably don't do their accounting in BTC.  They probably do it in RMB or USD.  In which case, the picture changes substantially.


Only those who do their accounting in BTC.  The true believers.  And a large proportion of the true believers would mine at a loss, even in fiat accounting, just to support the network and stay involved in the protocol, keep their hand hot, awaiting new opportunities.

But yes, point taken, they will not ROI in BTC, most of them.  Some will.  Certainly mining new alt-coins is very lucrative, with GPUs, at present.


That would be nice, but I wouldn't count on it.  Mining has been this way since early 2013.  No cracks are showing.  The failures we've seen have just meant cheap mining hardware, in bankruptcy sales.  The market for virgin coins is very brisk, and has been as long as I've been involved.  Could change.  No catalyst is evident however.


Transactions quintupled in 2012, tripled again in 2013.  They will more than triple in 2014.  But transaction count doesn't really impact BTC value directly.  It's the volume that impacts value directly.  Price and value not being equal, of course.  A risk-free discounting of a minimum future valuation indicates that value is much higher than price at present.

I do agree that most miners will hoard in order to get break-even or better in fiat terms.   I've been mining a while, and roughly 1/4 of my hardware has been negative in fiat terms at the time of mining but eventually positive with price changes, 1/2 has been positive in fiat at the time but negative in BTC, and 1/4 has been positive in BTC.    Overall, it's fiat positive, roughly BTC neutral.  When you do win, you tend to win big.  But it is a terrible crapshoot, and I wouldn't recommend it to anyone who can't get a sweet deal on a hot chip at the right time unless, like me, you just want to keep a large exposure surface to the BTC universe, to keep your awareness keen.

Or, as I like to call it, the "Don't buy at all with ~80% probability" rule :D

Que skeleton meme..