Wall Observer BTC/USD - Bitcoin price movement tracking & discussion - page 33292.

Rampion

legendary

Activity: 1148

Merit: 1018

Quote from: nmersulypnem on June 05, 2013, 10:43:13 AM

Quote from: Richy_T on June 05, 2013, 10:40:49 AM

Quote from: phoenix1 on June 05, 2013, 10:39:40 AM

Eventually everyone learns that they are pretty meaningless Grin

True. It's good to have an idea why they're meaningless though.

It's really just about organizing the conversations in different threads so we don't have to wade through tangents to find what we came here for...

But if you don't mind tangents, perhaps I can tell you about our lord and savior, Jesus?

I see you are a noob. This thread has always been a whorehouse about gut feelings, FUD spreading, funny GIFs (who is not a hardcore fan of TheKoziTwo?), and sometimes a little TA and some commentary on walls (which are nowhere to be seen lately, BTW).

That's what this thread is about - and it has always been.

If you want a thread about ONLY wall commenting, please go ahead and start your very own self-moderated topic.

oda.krell

legendary

Activity: 1470

Merit: 1007

Quote from: Richy_T on June 05, 2013, 10:31:12 AM

Quote from: oda.krell on June 05, 2013, 10:16:50 AM

log_(n)(x) and log_(n)(x+1) are of course not the same. If sarc stated that, he was wrong. Funny enough, for his results it shouldn't really matter much, the difference will be minimal I think.

It would have quite an effect when the price was really low (think around $0.1)

[snip]

Valid point. I forgot that trading started below 1 USD.

Anyway, to make it a bit more interesting for the general population of this thread, summary time!

(1) sarc's exact modelling techniques aside, the graph he posted is not entirely different from similar results that have been posted before. sarc's regression analysis sees the price below 30 USD right now (correct me I'm wrong, please), while the others had us in the realm of 50 USD (does anybody have a link to one of those?).

(2) regression analysis is a well-founded statistical technique, but by no means guaranteed to accurately predict the future price.

(2) Math is hard. Let's go shopping.

phoenix1

hero member

Activity: 798

Merit: 1000

Quote from: Richy_T on June 05, 2013, 10:40:49 AM

Quote from: phoenix1 on June 05, 2013, 10:39:40 AM

Eventually everyone learns that they are pretty meaningless Grin

True. It's good to have an idea why they're meaningless though.

nmersulypnem

full member

Activity: 238

Merit: 100

Quote from: Richy_T on June 05, 2013, 10:40:49 AM

Quote from: phoenix1 on June 05, 2013, 10:39:40 AM

Eventually everyone learns that they are pretty meaningless Grin

True. It's good to have an idea why they're meaningless though.

It's really just about organizing the conversations in different threads so we don't have to wade through tangents to find what we came here for...

But if you don't mind tangents, perhaps I can tell you about our lord and savior, Jesus?

Richy_T

legendary

Activity: 2576

Merit: 2267

1RichyTrEwPYjZSeAYxeiFBNnKC9UjC5k

Quote from: phoenix1 on June 05, 2013, 10:39:40 AM

Eventually everyone learns that they are pretty meaningless Grin

True. It's good to have an idea why they're meaningless though.

Richy_T

legendary

Activity: 2576

Merit: 2267

1RichyTrEwPYjZSeAYxeiFBNnKC9UjC5k

Quote from: Richy_T on June 05, 2013, 10:31:12 AM

It would have quite an effect when the price was really low (think around $0.1)

Which is to say, it would make older bitcoins look significantly more expensive, decreasing the estimated size of the exponential growth and making the projected price lower.

phoenix1

hero member

Activity: 798

Merit: 1000

Quote from: Richy_T on June 05, 2013, 10:34:16 AM

Quote from: nmersulypnem on June 05, 2013, 10:32:10 AM

Quote from: Rampion on June 05, 2013, 10:28:35 AM

Quote from: nmersulypnem on June 05, 2013, 10:23:18 AM

I thought this thread was about wall watching, not in-depth conversations about technical analysis. But maybe that was just me...

The beauty of this thread is that we make with it what we want. And we enjoy it. If you don't like it, that's why there is an ignore button. Just ignore the users who are not posting about "wall watching", and you are all set.

I just want to keep us on topic for everyone's benefit. I'd rather not ignore peope - maybe they'll have something useful to say in the future.

Anyway, just a suggestion folk - start a separate technical anal thread if you want to measure each other rulers.

OMG. People might actually learn something about the lines they're drawing all over the place. Shocked

Eventually everyone learns that they are pretty meaningless Grin

Richy_T

legendary

Activity: 2576

Merit: 2267

1RichyTrEwPYjZSeAYxeiFBNnKC9UjC5k

Quote from: nmersulypnem on June 05, 2013, 10:32:10 AM

Quote from: Rampion on June 05, 2013, 10:28:35 AM

Quote from: nmersulypnem on June 05, 2013, 10:23:18 AM

I thought this thread was about wall watching, not in-depth conversations about technical analysis. But maybe that was just me...

The beauty of this thread is that we make with it what we want. And we enjoy it. If you don't like it, that's why there is an ignore button. Just ignore the users who are not posting about "wall watching", and you are all set.

I just want to keep us on topic for everyone's benefit. I'd rather not ignore peope - maybe they'll have something useful to say in the future.

Anyway, just a suggestion folk - start a separate technical anal thread if you want to measure each other rulers.

OMG. People might actually learn something about the lines they're drawing all over the place. Shocked

nmersulypnem

full member

Activity: 238

Merit: 100

Quote from: Rampion on June 05, 2013, 10:28:35 AM

Quote from: nmersulypnem on June 05, 2013, 10:23:18 AM

I thought this thread was about wall watching, not in-depth conversations about technical analysis. But maybe that was just me...

The beauty of this thread is that we make with it what we want. And we enjoy it. If you don't like it, that's why there is an ignore button. Just ignore the users who are not posting about "wall watching", and you are all set.

I just want to keep us on topic for everyone's benefit. I'd rather not ignore peope - maybe they'll have something useful to say in the future.

Anyway, just a suggestion folk - start a separate technical anal thread if you want to measure each other rulers.

Richy_T

legendary

Activity: 2576

Merit: 2267

1RichyTrEwPYjZSeAYxeiFBNnKC9UjC5k

Quote from: oda.krell on June 05, 2013, 10:16:50 AM

log_(n)(x) and log_(n)(x+1) are of course not the same. If sarc stated that, he was wrong. Funny enough, for his results it shouldn't really matter much, the difference will be minimal I think.

It would have quite an effect when the price was really low (think around $0.1)

Consider that x is not unitless. Now, when you do logs, that tends to factor out - log(x*y)=log(x)+log(y). Even though you logically can't log a unit, it just kinda falls out because you're looking at the shape. But you *must* have units agree for addition. Hence sarc has log($x+$1). Why $1? What if we price the Bitcoin in cents? Is it now x+1 or x+100? What about Euros? Lira? Litecoins?

I think sarc may be misapplying this from another modelling technique.

sarc

member

Activity: 98

Merit: 10

Quote from: oda.krell on June 05, 2013, 10:21:03 AM

Quote from: sarc on June 05, 2013, 10:15:27 AM

nope.
log(x+1) is right for this data, that's how I'm able to fit a straight line to it and make a valid estimate of the underlying trend to date.

Do you really mean:

log(x+1)

as in

log_(n)(x+1), where x = USD/btc, and n is the base you chose? If so, maybe that's a technique used in statistical modeling, but it certainly is not correct per se.

I've actually used log10(x+1), which looks optimal for modelling the underlying trend.

But I'm thinking that if we can't get past the transformation applied to run the analysis, then its point is very underwhelming for many anyway. Still, it's a pretty graph.

phoenix1

hero member

Activity: 798

Merit: 1000

Quote from: nmersulypnem on June 05, 2013, 10:23:18 AM

I thought this thread was about wall watching, not in-depth conversations about technical analysis. But maybe that was just me...

No ... its also about watching people banging their head against walls Tongue

Can't believe I stepped out for 2 hours and you guys are still at it ... get a room Cheesy

Hey Rampion, wanna know what else happens in GofT ?? Grin

Rampion

legendary

Activity: 1148

Merit: 1018

Quote from: nmersulypnem on June 05, 2013, 10:23:18 AM

I thought this thread was about wall watching, not in-depth conversations about technical analysis. But maybe that was just me...

The beauty of this thread is that we make with it what we want. And we enjoy it. If you don't like it, that's why there is an ignore button. Just ignore the users who are not posting about "wall watching", and you are all set.

Jozzaboy

member

Activity: 98

Merit: 10

Quote from: nmersulypnem on June 05, 2013, 10:23:18 AM

I thought this thread was about wall watching, not in-depth conversations about technical analysis. But maybe that was just me...

Quoted for truth. Besides, this is Bitcoin. It tend to do what it feels like, depending on public faith in the currency not technical analysis and straight lines.

nmersulypnem

full member

Activity: 238

Merit: 100

I thought this thread was about wall watching, not in-depth conversations about technical analysis. But maybe that was just me...

oda.krell

legendary

Activity: 1470

Merit: 1007

Quote from: Rampion on June 05, 2013, 10:19:40 AM

That is pretty much consistent with EW analysis, isn't it? I mean, the bottom of wave 4 (bottom post-2013 crash) is aprox. the top of wave 1 (2011 bubble high), isn't it?
[...]
As I said earlier I arrived to the same conclusion using my very own "common sense" and analysis after April, 10th - but now I believe I was mistaken.

I know close to nothing about EW analysis. In any case, I don't think we'll fall back to 50, and certainly not sub-30. I can see us going back to 60-80, though, I admit :/

oda.krell

legendary

Activity: 1470

Merit: 1007

Quote from: sarc on June 05, 2013, 10:15:27 AM

nope.
log(x+1) is right for this data, that's how I'm able to fit a straight line to it and make a valid estimate of the underlying trend to date.

Do you really mean:

log(x+1)

as in

log_(n)(x+1), where x = USD/btc, and n is the base you chose? If so, maybe that's a technique used in statistical modeling, but it certainly is not correct per se.

Rampion

legendary

Activity: 1148

Merit: 1018

Quote from: oda.krell on June 05, 2013, 10:12:29 AM

Correction to my own post above:

30 USD is (probably, I didn't calculate it myself) the result of linear regression and, as I understood sarc, removing some outlier data (i.e. the bubbles).

The other charts I've seen that use the entire data have as at around 50 USD, IIRC.

That is pretty much consistent with EW analysis, isn't it? I mean, the bottom of wave 4 (bottom post-2013 crash) is aprox. the top of wave 1 (2011 bubble high), isn't it?

As I said earlier I arrived to the same conclusion using my very own "common sense" and analysis after April, 10th - but now I believe I was mistaken.

oda.krell

legendary

Activity: 1470

Merit: 1007

Quote from: Richy_T on June 05, 2013, 10:06:00 AM

Quote from: oda.krell on June 05, 2013, 10:03:12 AM

Anyway, unless we start doing the mathematical part of this discussion in a more systematic fashion, I'm afraid we will keep misunderstanding each others' points.

I'm game for it. If you're looking at base notation, I seem to recall having used [for example] loge(x) and log10(x). Obviously, it is not standard notation but a compromise for a text-based medium.

I believe prof clarified things a little at one point and sarc continued to assert the incorrect thing as correct [ log(x+1) ].

As I wrote in my 'EDIT' already, there is no disagreement between us re: correct use of log, only a confusion of notation (more due to my part, I admit, my way of writing it was highly misleading)

log_(n)(x) and log_(n)(x+1) are of course not the same. If sarc stated that, he was wrong. Funny enough, for his results it shouldn't really matter much, the difference will be minimal I think.

sarc

member

Activity: 98

Merit: 10

Quote from: Richy_T on June 05, 2013, 10:06:00 AM

Quote from: oda.krell on June 05, 2013, 10:03:12 AM

Anyway, unless we start doing the mathematical part of this discussion in a more systematic fashion, I'm afraid we will keep misunderstanding each others' points.

I'm game for it. If you're looking at base notation, I seem to recall having used [for example] loge(x) and log10(x). Obviously, if you could use real notation, it would be different.

I believe prof clarified things a little at one point and sarc continued to assert the incorrect thing as correct [ log(x+1) ].

nope.
log(x+1) is right for this data, that's how I'm able to fit a straight line to it and make a valid estimate of the underlying trend to date.

Topic: Wall Observer BTC/USD - Bitcoin price movement tracking & discussion - page 33292. (Read 26498590 times)