The lead up to the halving is usually volatile. The price will drop again once any major publication posts the theory that at halving the miners will all stop mining (along with the implications of what happens to Bitcoin then).
Just enough people will be worried enough to sell bringing the price down yet again.
The lower the better to launch the price rise at halving, when mining continues at its normal pace.
This time around I am not sure how this Corona virus will affect the price. It may turn into a hedge, the Fed will certainly pump as much as they can which helps.
The US is finally getting cases of people affected. China started in November and by January there was full panic. US having first deaths in March could mean full panic mode in May just as the halving happens.
If the mining panic drives the price down, people may not see it as a safe haven during the crisis.
It could either be a perfect storm for a big bitcoin price or the timing counters sentiment such that it is just a normal rise starting at halving.
I certainly went out and stocked up on enough food for about a month. Fortunately I am far from Panama City and there are no reported cases here yet.
Topic: Wall Observer BTC/USD - Bitcoin price movement tracking & discussion - page 8276. (Read 26711027 times)
March 02, 2020, 11:59:23 AM
March 02, 2020, 11:53:47 AM
a sea of green in the alts
risk on
risk on
March 02, 2020, 11:34:35 AM
BTCMILLIONAIRE
Welcome back
Thanks! Welcome back
March 02, 2020, 11:29:26 AM
BTCMILLIONAIRE
Welcome back
Welcome back
March 02, 2020, 11:24:06 AM
Announcements > Bitfinex To Cease Trading for Several Trading Pairs with Low Liquidity March 02, 2020
https://www.bitfinex.com/posts/461
Quote
We would like to announce the removal of several trading pairs due to its low liquidity on our platform.
The removal of these trading pairs is a common measure that serves to consolidate and improve liquidity on Bitfinex, leading to a more streamlined and optimised trading experience for our users.
From 06/03/20 10:00 AM UTC
The removal of these trading pairs is a common measure that serves to consolidate and improve liquidity on Bitfinex, leading to a more streamlined and optimised trading experience for our users.
From 06/03/20 10:00 AM UTC
https://www.bitfinex.com/posts/461
March 02, 2020, 10:42:21 AM
Is the trajectory constant or not? You are employing a loose definition of the word "constant" to make your case here. Within the "random deviations from the trajectory" could exist several other trajectories, depending on what span of time we're talking about. Within the cluster of those sub-trajectories exists risk if you are a shorter-term trader.
You didn't even know the trajectory was upward until after it had taken place, so to say it was a "risk free" investment is a statement made after the fact, and basically meaningless. Its like making a prediction on 2015's price of bitcoin in 2020. Sure, after the fact, we can say that the overall trajectory was up, and there existed a lot of volatility in the middle. But nobody knew it was a risk-free investment in 2015.
I'm starting to feel like you're trolling me now. What part about "a constant trajectory around which the price oscillates" do you not understand?You didn't even know the trajectory was upward until after it had taken place, so to say it was a "risk free" investment is a statement made after the fact, and basically meaningless. Its like making a prediction on 2015's price of bitcoin in 2020. Sure, after the fact, we can say that the overall trajectory was up, and there existed a lot of volatility in the middle. But nobody knew it was a risk-free investment in 2015.
Not even going to address the rest of the post until we've established why you refuse to understand this and keep repeating the same wrong thing over and over even when it's pointed out to you.
"Volatility, in essence, is nothing but a random oscillation around a potentially unknown trajectory."
You're talking about a moving average that could only be established after a bunch of data points had been collected, which is the main thing I have an issue with. In order for something to be a "risk free investment", you're implying that somehow the trajectory could be established prior to it happening. I'm saying it couldn't. Only after the fact could it be demonstrated to be risk free. It just sounds like you ascribe to trend following, which is fine, but that doesn't negate the correlation between volatility and risk.
So what am I getting wrong?
You don't have to bother addressing the rest of the post if you don't want to.
March 02, 2020, 10:33:21 AM
Is the trajectory constant or not? You are employing a loose definition of the word "constant" to make your case here. Within the "random deviations from the trajectory" could exist several other trajectories, depending on what span of time we're talking about. Within the cluster of those sub-trajectories exists risk if you are a shorter-term trader.
You didn't even know the trajectory was upward until after it had taken place, so to say it was a "risk free" investment is a statement made after the fact, and basically meaningless. Its like making a prediction on 2015's price of bitcoin in 2020. Sure, after the fact, we can say that the overall trajectory was up, and there existed a lot of volatility in the middle. But nobody knew it was a risk-free investment in 2015.
I'm starting to feel like you're trolling me now. What part about "a constant trajectory around which the price oscillates" do you not understand?You didn't even know the trajectory was upward until after it had taken place, so to say it was a "risk free" investment is a statement made after the fact, and basically meaningless. Its like making a prediction on 2015's price of bitcoin in 2020. Sure, after the fact, we can say that the overall trajectory was up, and there existed a lot of volatility in the middle. But nobody knew it was a risk-free investment in 2015.
Not even going to address the rest of the post until we've established why you refuse to understand this and keep repeating the same wrong thing over and over even when it's pointed out to you.
"Volatility, in essence, is nothing but a random oscillation around a potentially unknown trajectory."
March 02, 2020, 10:32:06 AM
https://twitter.com/Coronavirus_Guy/status/1234204006810935301
tl;dr carnivores are 100% immune to the pox /jk
This is interesting. Different people eat different things, which obviously implies biological differences.tl;dr carnivores are 100% immune to the pox /jk
It is well known that a lot of animals have sub-races within the same species. One example is ants, where some of them are workers while others are soldiers who protect the hive. They are the same specie, but the soldiers are several times bigger than the workers and they do not work, only fight to protect the hive.
Another example is a type of rodent (i forget which). They live in underground caves, but some of them don't really do much. They are bigger than the others, and they just laze around and eat a lot. However, when the rain comes they serve a very important function. They waddle up to the entrance of the cave, and plug it with their big fat butt. An easy and lazy life in exchange for a risk of being eaten by a wandering predator.
What about humans? We used to live in tribes. Some men would spend most of their time in camp, building clay pots and playing with the kids, while others would be out hunting animals (or other humans), risking their life to protect and provide for the tribe. It is possible (and I would say seems reasonable) that there are genetic differences between different types of men. At the least, we can say for sure that there are psychological differences.
Does diet correlate to psychological traits? I have never seen any studies about this, but I would guess that it does. Different lifestyles obviously require different physical abilities and different ways of thinking, it would make sense that that means different types of food are optimal.
Maybe, just maybe, this virus is more likely to be fatal for soyboys than normal men. Would be very interesting to see some statistics, once we have enough samples.
So, maybe testosterone is the cure. We should just throw infected men into a pit to fight over a slab of bacon.
Also, you remind me of the Japanese concept of grass-eating men
As for family, if it turns out to be possible. It's not in the west. That's part of why I'm moving elsewhere.
Yes it does. Colon is lined with enormous count of nerve cells, which are believed to interact with the brain. As well as i don't have a source link handy, i don't know if this evidence was strengthened in the meantime.
And according to this, heavy consumption of certain food, wheat meal, HFCS, sucrose, fat... harms, at least changes gut bacteria that is linked to process or create serotonine/dopamine in the colon. On the other hand, colon bacteria population was discovered to be influenced by psychic illness, and the findings correlated to a good amount to the colon popuplation of obese people.
It's a two sided sword indeed, while fructose and fructans (fructose alcohols, as in wheat) play an important role here.
For example, i was diagnosed as anxious/depressive two decades ago, and i was able to change my mood and strength by a diet i held because i was later diagnosed with fructose malabsorption. Even today, when i eat too much fructose/fructans i get angry, nervous, my muscles become weak and hurt, skin problems etc.
My colon suffered from inflammation for decades, taking a shit several times a day was causing malnutrition, which in turn led to vitamin deficiencies, these caused my memory problems.
So i can say for sure that brain fitness and nutrition are linked directly.
March 02, 2020, 10:19:17 AM
Again, a "constant upward trajectory" creates zero volatility.
Reading comprehension.I was never talking about "constant upward trajectory", but about "constant upward trajectory with volatility around the trajectory"; or in other words random deviations from the trajectory.
Is the trajectory constant or not? You are employing a loose definition of the word "constant" to make your case here. Within the "random deviations from the trajectory" could exist several other trajectories, depending on what span of time we're talking about. Within the cluster of those sub-trajectories exists risk if you are a shorter-term trader.
You didn't even know the trajectory was upward until after it had taken place, so to say it was a "risk free" investment is a statement made after the fact, and basically meaningless. Its like making a prediction on 2015's price of bitcoin in 2020. Sure, after the fact, we can say that the overall trajectory was up, and there existed a lot of volatility in the middle. But nobody knew it was a risk-free investment in 2015.
Volatility, in essence, is nothing but a random oscillation around a potentially unknown trajectory.
This, again, means that you can have assets of arbitrary volatility that fall into all three categories of: 1.) negative risk 2.) positive risk and 3.) neutral risk.
This, again, means that you can have assets of arbitrary volatility that fall into all three categories of: 1.) negative risk 2.) positive risk and 3.) neutral risk.
This all has to do with the span and timing of your trades/investments. Stocks and other assets go up and down and many have several different trajectories within their lifespans.
Bitcoin is just one of a countless number of assets and has no relevance to the definition of volatility.
It may serve as an example for an asset with high volatility and negative risk (e.g. an expected long-term return greater zero) that may, despite having a positive expected return, still reduce your capital to ashes; which makes it a rather interesting case.
It may serve as an example for an asset with high volatility and negative risk (e.g. an expected long-term return greater zero) that may, despite having a positive expected return, still reduce your capital to ashes; which makes it a rather interesting case.
It makes it risky is what it makes it. Who gets to decide bitcoin has a "positive expected return"? And for what period of time?
But that does not imply that all volatile assets are risky.
Everything that is traded under the sun has a certain degree of volatility and a certain degree of risk. The more volatile something is, the greater chance exists for financial ruin. It seems to be a no-brainer. Don't know why you would argue against that.
Arguing about hypothetical situations taken advantage of to the maximum degree doesn't negate the correlation between risk and volatility. You should probably give this a read through:
https://www.investopedia.com/terms/v/volatility.asp
March 02, 2020, 10:06:08 AM
-snip-
Quote
Jon Cuncliffe, the deputy governor for financial stability of the United Kingdom’s central bank, the Bank of England (BoE)
Name checks out.
Haha! That was my first thought too.
March 02, 2020, 10:04:21 AM
Good morning Bitcoinland.
Up a wee... currently $8830USD/$11792CAD (Bitcoinaverage).
Keep it coming.
which one? Names pls.
JHW of course, ya noob
it says:
יהוה
Dude!
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tetragrammaton
Of course, i presented kind of a modernised representation. Didn't want to throw full hardcore at you, but i see i can't add anything of value for you now.
"I am that i am" is also the far better translation, forgive my sloppiness.
Up a wee... currently $8830USD/$11792CAD (Bitcoinaverage).
Keep it coming.
WHERE IS YOUR GOD NOW?
which one? Names pls.
JHW of course, ya noob
it says:
יהוה
Dude!
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tetragrammaton
Of course, i presented kind of a modernised representation. Didn't want to throw full hardcore at you, but i see i can't add anything of value for you now.
"I am that i am" is also the far better translation, forgive my sloppiness.
March 02, 2020, 10:03:20 AM
Guys we are going up again. Don't jinx it, if you want your new lambo in 2020!
We want BTC not Lambo
March 02, 2020, 09:59:50 AM
-snip-
Quote
Jon Cuncliffe, the deputy governor for financial stability of the United Kingdom’s central bank, the Bank of England (BoE)
Name checks out.
March 02, 2020, 09:55:52 AM
Guys we are going up again. Don't jinx it, if you want your new lambo in 2020!
March 02, 2020, 09:54:27 AM
It's funny how people expect an economic collapse for their BTC to rise in value, when the next BTC bullrun will probably be accompanied by stock market increases
https://www.tradingview.com/chart/BTCUSD/tSSkaRsS-Hey-BTC-Bulls-Do-Not-Pray-for-an-Economic-Crisis/
https://www.tradingview.com/chart/BTCUSD/tSSkaRsS-Hey-BTC-Bulls-Do-Not-Pray-for-an-Economic-Crisis/
March 02, 2020, 09:53:26 AM
https://twitter.com/Coronavirus_Guy/status/1234204006810935301
tl;dr carnivores are 100% immune to the pox /jk
This is interesting. Different people eat different things, which obviously implies biological differences.tl;dr carnivores are 100% immune to the pox /jk
It is well known that a lot of animals have sub-races within the same species. One example is ants, where some of them are workers while others are soldiers who protect the hive. They are the same specie, but the soldiers are several times bigger than the workers and they do not work, only fight to protect the hive.
Another example is a type of rodent (i forget which). They live in underground caves, but some of them don't really do much. They are bigger than the others, and they just laze around and eat a lot. However, when the rain comes they serve a very important function. They waddle up to the entrance of the cave, and plug it with their big fat butt. An easy and lazy life in exchange for a risk of being eaten by a wandering predator.
What about humans? We used to live in tribes. Some men would spend most of their time in camp, building clay pots and playing with the kids, while others would be out hunting animals (or other humans), risking their life to protect and provide for the tribe. It is possible (and I would say seems reasonable) that there are genetic differences between different types of men. At the least, we can say for sure that there are psychological differences.
Does diet correlate to psychological traits? I have never seen any studies about this, but I would guess that it does. Different lifestyles obviously require different physical abilities and different ways of thinking, it would make sense that that means different types of food are optimal.
Maybe, just maybe, this virus is more likely to be fatal for soyboys than normal men. Would be very interesting to see some statistics, once we have enough samples.
So, maybe testosterone is the cure. We should just throw infected men into a pit to fight over a slab of bacon.
Also, you remind me of the Japanese concept of grass-eating men
As for family, if it turns out to be possible. It's not in the west. That's part of why I'm moving elsewhere.
March 02, 2020, 09:49:06 AM
https://twitter.com/Coronavirus_Guy/status/1234204006810935301
tl;dr carnivores are 100% immune to the pox /jk
This is interesting. Different people eat different things, which obviously implies biological differences.tl;dr carnivores are 100% immune to the pox /jk
It is well known that a lot of animals have sub-races within the same species. One example is ants, where some of them are workers while others are soldiers who protect the hive. They are the same specie, but the soldiers are several times bigger than the workers and they do not work, only fight to protect the hive.
Another example is a type of rodent (i forget which). They live in underground caves, but some of them don't really do much. They are bigger than the others, and they just laze around and eat a lot. However, when the rain comes they serve a very important function. They waddle up to the entrance of the cave, and plug it with their big fat butt. An easy and lazy life in exchange for a risk of being eaten by a wandering predator.
What about humans? We used to live in tribes. Some men would spend most of their time in camp, building clay pots and playing with the kids, while others would be out hunting animals (or other humans), risking their life to protect and provide for the tribe. It is possible (and I would say seems reasonable) that there are genetic differences between different types of men. At the least, we can say for sure that there are psychological differences.
Does diet correlate to psychological traits? I have never seen any studies about this, but I would guess that it does. Different lifestyles obviously require different physical abilities and different ways of thinking, it would make sense that that means different types of food are optimal.
Maybe, just maybe, this virus is more likely to be fatal for soyboys than normal men. Would be very interesting to see some statistics, once we have enough samples.
So, maybe testosterone is the cure. We should just throw infected men into a pit to fight over a slab of bacon.
Also, you remind me of the Japanese concept of grass-eating men
March 02, 2020, 09:47:50 AM
If 'ifs' and 'and' were pots and pans, well, guess what happens next.
Irrelevant to the argument. I was giving you an example of a volatile investment with negative risk to show to you that your understanding of volatility is wrong.Again, a "constant upward trajectory" creates zero volatility.
Reading comprehension.I was never talking about "constant upward trajectory", but about "constant upward trajectory with volatility around the trajectory"; or in other words random deviations from the trajectory. In the long-term volatility is very often irrelevant, in the short term it may, but need not necessarily increase risk.
Volatility, in essence, is nothing but a random oscillation around a potentially unknown trajectory.
This, again, means that you can have assets of arbitrary volatility that fall into all three categories of: 1.) negative risk 2.) positive risk and 3.) neutral risk.
If you are a long-term trader, then sure, the overall trend of bitcoin has been up, but that does not mean that it completely lacks volatility and risk.
Bitcoin is just one of a countless number of assets and has no relevance to the definition of volatility.It may serve as an example for an asset with high volatility and negative risk (e.g. an expected long-term return greater zero) that may, despite having a positive expected return, still reduce your capital to ashes; which makes it a rather interesting case.
But that does not imply that all volatile assets are risky.
March 02, 2020, 09:34:03 AM
Not as nice as 5-dig, but I do like the 8888 looking price a lot on this particular Monday
March 02, 2020, 09:27:46 AM
Volatility absolutely equals risk.
No, it most certainly does not.If you had a constant upward trajectory with a slope of p, then any "constant" (e.g. predictable) form of volatility around that trajectory would provide a 100% risk-free and arbitrarily volatile long-term investment with an expected positive annual return of p.
In other words, volatility can but need not be a factor in risk.
If 'ifs' and 'and' were pots and pans, well, guess what happens next.
Again, a "constant upward trajectory" creates zero volatility. You have the same gain being made on a daily basis, which means it has a standard deviation of zero across any given time period, which means it has a complete lack of volatility.
Anything that moves up or down to any varying degree is volatile, and therefore subject to risk (I suppose the exception would be if it only ever moved in the up direction to varying degrees, then you could have volatility with zero risk). If you are a long-term trader, then sure, the overall trend of bitcoin has been up, but that does not mean that it completely lacks volatility and risk.
Jump to: