Topic: Wall Observer BTC/USD - Bitcoin price movement tracking & discussion - page 33614. (Read 26495439 times)

I think there is plenty much where that came from.

A lot of buying pressure, it's just that no one wants to chew threw that $2.2M boat load of coins from $114-$120. If the asks want to come down to $108-$112 they'll sell coins all day.

1000 BTC sold . Price didn't move much.

I'm not sure you can set up RULES :-)

Best and most true post in this huge thread.

My market making bot would make bank wallet.dat.

A stable sine wave of about 20USD of amplitude and about 15 minutes of wavelength for a few days would be nice...

Anything that isn't on a log chart is just chart manipulation.  

Sorry to dig up a slightly older post (posted earlier today, already 4 pages in o_O), but this is a pet peeve of mine:

No, the "January-March trend [...] doubling every 30 days" is not per se, as you say, "unsustainable". What you're doing there is repeating the worn-out mantra "exponential growth is not sustainable". Unless of course when it is, either in finance, or in nature[1].

What you probably should have said would have been something like: "a given exponential growth function, causally connected (however losely) to something of finite quantity, will eventually reach a point at which it drastically outgrows said finite quantity".

This is not just some empty semantic nitpicking. The difference in wording here amounts to the difference between lazy repetition of half-understood claims about the world, and a meaningful statement about the sustainability of growth.

Please note: I am not making any claims about the correctness of the January trendline. I just refuse to let a lazy statement like that slide by, that at face value claims that exponential growth is somehow an oddity, and its usage as a way to model reality ought to be rejected.

If you think that a particular exponential trend is not accurate, present your arguments (for fairness sake, in other threads you have been doing that. Sort of.). But the statement as it stands, in its unconditional form, is not fundamentally different from a perma-bull's battle cry "We'll inevitably reach 300k USD/btc next week". Both claims are devoid of information.

* * *

[1] A common rebuttal to the Apple case is "But now the price comes crashing down! So exponential growth is unsustainable after all". The fallacy here is of course that just because at a certain point exponential growth of a given magnitude must end, does not imply that up to that point the growth was not accurately described by a particular exponential function.

Ok cool, I was getting worried there for a minute !

We'll just draw new ones. On log charts, of course.

Guys... The Humble Double Fine Bundle now accepts BITCOIN!

If Totalbiscuit starts talking about it...  

If we stay at the current price for a week don't we break the trendlines ?

How many new merchants and exchanges were there in July 2011 compared to now? That's the biggest factor in if it will play out similarly in my opinion.

Price hovered around $14 for a month in July 2011. It didn't help.

Not affecting it immediately and clearly perhaps but you can be sure it does affect it.

As dull as it is, we need a period of nothing, calm, stability, no panics.

If we manage that for a week or so we can skip the whole slow demise we saw in 2011.

It's interesting that news isn't affecting the price much anymore. I mean just today, http://www.gyft.com is pretty huge news. I can go to almost every retail store I normally shop at in the U.S, and pay with bitcoins through them.

Fundamentals are improving as fast as ever, regardless of what the price is doing. Now we just need some of these new exchanges to be successful.

Ah diddums. Did we lose some money?

In what parallel universe do you live where rich people don't want to get richer?