Topic: Wall Observer BTC/USD - Bitcoin price movement tracking & discussion - page 33461. (Read 26496413 times)

I've made a couple of successful trades via: Sell BTC on Ripple -> Fiat to BitStamp -> Buy BTC at Bitstamp.  Rinse and repeat.  Fiat transfer was super quick too.

BUT..there is almost no liquidity in Ripple, so selling at near MtGox prices is difficult and took most of the day just to pull off 2 trades that were worth the effort.  The good news is I really only paid a fee at Bitstamp so the potential is there and I could sell a bit lower but, just not enough trades happening from Ripple to really take advantage yet.

Omnipotence implies logical contradiction and therefore cannot exist in this universe.  (Could god create a rock he himself cannot lift? )


The value proposition of eternal bliss or eternal damnation is still finite

Wait was I on topic?  

Sure he can.  Don't be goofy.  He's omnipotent.  He breaks logic for breakfast!  A=~A every day of the year.
The infinite numbers are fine.  Eternal bliss & eternal damnation!
[/theology]

If I may extrapolate on that (with a chart of course)...



...the weekly step-down in volume would be explained by those having had to travel furthest leaving their trading desks on the 2nd week of April to start their trek to the conference, followed by those next-furthest away in the 3rd week of April and so on so that last week's volume drop-off can be explained by the Californians departing for San Jose  Let's see what happens as everyone returns home

On a more serious note I'm fascinated looking at the prices on the same weekly chart, especially the EMA (3)

Look how insignificant by now April's  'crash' was;
Look at the massive contrast between the huge volume drop-off and the virtually unmoving (but slightly upward) price.

Meanwhile the transaction volume (in USD) appears only just to have dropped out of the $20.000.000 - $60,000,000 channel.



Given that more than a small part of the transaction volume must be currency trading transactions and that trading transactions have almost died off entirely I'm surprised we are only now seeing the overall transaction volume drop.  Does this mean transactions other than currency trading are going up?

I wonder if the trading volume were to drop off further or stablise at today's levels would the price fall to any significant degree?  I'm suspecting, based on the failure of low volumes to trigger sell-offs that the vast proportion of bitcoins is in strong hands by now.  Whether or not the price is being manipulated I believe the nervous have had plenty of opportunity to close their positions by now and we have also seen buyers come pouring in every time there is a dip.

So if I were to make a prediction it would be that the longer we hang around this price mark the more likely we are to continue to go mainly sideways.  When the market is too calm for day-traders to make anything we get an idea of what currency-trading is required to sustain (non-currency-trading) transaction volumes.  And if that's steady or rising there should be enough liquidity to satisfy their requirements without shifting the price very far either way.

In the meantime if we get another wave of speculators or of long-term savers (hoarders) or if existing speculators/hoarders decide to increase their bitcoin holding then up we go again.

Call me an eternal optimist but I'm failing to see credible downward pressures
 

Isn't it over?

Ref low volume on holidays and weekends: does that concept apply for Bitcoin at all? Banking holiday in Japan is a valid reason, but I somehow doubt, a majority of BTC is traded by wallstreet guys who sit in an office at daytime. Would be great, if anyone has any data on that. A contra argument could be (not saying it is): BTC is mostly privately owned, thus people trade in their freetime.



Bid sum is still very bullish and even rising a bit in the last hours. If a breakout happens, it could be soon.

ITT: Missing the point because mad at the mention of God and channeling the spirit of r/atheism.

You got it!  It's ALT COIN!

Pascal's wager is wrong because no God as defined in human religion can exist.

Ignoring that is is wrong because he uses infinite numbers while these should obviously be finite.

That is not true about only a Black Swan in hindsight, it is merely hard to predict. So, for the masses it is near impossible to predict. A few (including me) called the internet as a Black Swan. Now I'm saying cryptocurrencies (maybe BTC) are the next big Black Swan. And they are Anti-fragile to boot. Very very powerful (see Sig).   

I think you have to add another column...."Wrong God Exists" there to be more accurate. 

Isn't there an infinite chance that the god he could "believe in" is the wrong one?

In that case believing in no god is probably better than believing in the wrong one.

In other words, you see nothing wrong with Pascal's Wager?http://s20.postimg.org/tznsaqqt9/Capture.jpg

Black Swan is only a Black Swan in hindsight.  'Til then, it's a Red Herring or an Ugly Duckling