this.

the weak hands who bought in at 50-60 sold at $100. the strong hands sure as hell aren't selling now.

it isn't as hard as you think  

i noticed the downtrend was exhausted from a number of indicators as early as yesterday evening. take a look at my thread "arepo's price analysis" for the details.

--arepo

at this point, i'm starting to see this as likely. if we continue this consolidation in the short-term without breaking out, that would be a signal to sell. all i was saying was that i was confident $120 would hold overnight.

agree, i called the bottom in my thread.

sorry, didn't mean to make you search

this guy, more specificially, i've been discussing signs that this is a market bottom in pages 6-8.

not gonna happen. look at that mini-bull! see his strong trendline! the train stopped briefly but is quickly departing again.. toot

nope, this is bearish. latest triangle broke down, hard -- that was the first sign.

-increasing ask depth, decreasing bid depth, bid/ask depth crossover -- bearish

-MACD crossover -- bearish

-StochRSI entering oversold zone -- bearish

-RSI resting on mid-term trend line -- neutral/high risk for bulls

--arepo

looks like an intentional DDoS attack. spam-selling smallest units possible at a decent rate.

almost 10 minutes of lag now... im not sure if people are panicking or if this attack is single-handedly taking gox down...

wat

we'll likely test $120 in the next 6 hours. bulls, pray that it holds -- because we're in for a rare bitcoin bear market otherwise...

this means bullish for the long-term, which i can agree with. unfortunately we are severely short-term overbought, are in the midst of a minibear, and are encroaching on an extremely important mid-term support. if you really want the market to do what you want, take your cash and put a wall at $120, else we'll possibly crash right through later today.

... these are not the only market forces coordinating this sell-off ...

this forum consistently underestimates the complexity of the price function, generally speaking. too many n00bs methinks.

stop thinking you know how shit works already and deign to try to figure some of it out, why dontchya?

DDoS and manipulator are both tinfoil hat responses -- they were involved but not solely responsible.

there was a DDoS performed by what seemed like a bot for about 15 min that brought gox lag up to approx. 10 min.

this occurred a few hours ago.

i am an analyst and i concur

if we break $125, we're going to test $120 again. bulls better hope that holds, or else there be bears ahead.

that seems to be where we're heading:

far too much demand, at this point... deflation is kicking in.

you should be able to estimate from the scale of the triangle -- so before the end of the week.

i wish it weren't so, but he could be shown to be right pretty soon... the wall will fall

the triangle seems bullish to you?

on that small of a scale, it's going to be very bumpy. of course we're not heading straight down -- price doesn't move that way. the graph i posted here was a weekly scale -- and i'm confident we'll at least test the $120 resistance before the week is out. also, trading on a single indicator is a bad idea 

i said it before and i'll say it again, lizardman, take your allegedly huge chunk of capital and park it at $120 if you want to have a chance at this bet.

well, you're clearly a professional

learn2managerisk

that's how you manage risk. good job. lizardman is gonna swallow some hilarious losses if he really is all-in.

edit: or at least miss out on bitcoin-denominated profit by having no fiat as the price moves down. does anyone know what his base price is?

this thread is a circus. and you, lizardman -- you're the ringleader. thanks for the overconfidence and letting me know that you were 'all-in', it was a very reliable contrarian indicator, and it paid my whole months rent as i slept peacefully.

oh, and does your so-called 'fibonacci analysis' only work after we start crsahing? you changed your tune quite a bit once we broke that $120 wall. told you you ought to have parked some capital there.... if you were clever and not so self-absorbed as to be unable to interact appropriately with others, you'd have managed risk and kept liquid funds, made the bear put more accessible to people on the forum so that they'd actually take it (there was a decent amount of demand), and then parked the capital on $120. i think that may have helped soften this capitulation, and it would have been a great hedge.

oh well xP

yes, thank you for re-posting my work (from two days ago). i, unlike lizardman, fully accept that i am not 100% sure of price movements, and don't offer hundred-thousand-dollar put options.

if you'd read on, i discussed that model and a few reasons why it may have failed so spectacularly. yesterday, after the triangle broke down, i immediately warned of a retest of $120. last night, i opened a short.

tl;dr  -- you're quote-mining, and it doesn't matter if i was wrong two days ago if i can still profit today

this is stated quite a bit on the forums, and i always found it especially ironic because it seems to be the case that it really is the speaker's own ignorance that is being projected...

very similar to what happened in the other thread with zanglebert. nothing against him, but you really need to inform yourself about a topic before passing judgment, or else you're no better than the people on something awful who circlejerk about how idiotic bitcoin is without ever fully understanding it.

and you don't have the qualifications to make this statement. stop posting about my work, please.

same person? i smell an agenda.

we don't have to be enemies... this is a community i have nothing against you, fitty.

bear markets make people really unhappy also tons of newbies who haven't acclimated to etiquette and such. i'm not surprised proudhon left 

how did you come up with a downward direction here? i see the triangle, but triangle formations themselves tend not to have directional bias. by my analysis we've reached a short-term bottom.

try 6 hours.

-===-

*10-day 2-hour scale*



-===-

we've reached a short-term bottom. rebound is likely, CCI will reach to its recent high (at about -50), and then likely bounce. this corresponds with a price of about $100. if we break through this resistance, we could see as high as $125, although mitigating factors like low liquidity on weekends may affect these values.

--arepo

edit:

exactly, the utter despair on the forums today along with the oversold signals on many oscillators, and a high-volume doji at the $80 bottom all point to a significant rebound.

market sentiment lags price perfectly

i post my analysis as a free service to the forum. if that service is undesirable to you, feel free to put me on ignore. the sarcastic comments about my 'bravery' are completely unnecessary.

proof

thanks, i wasn't gonna feed the troll.

edit: also, nobody should by trading by my charts. i am not a financial adviser. i simply wish to share my analysis of the price, and assume that you use it to inform your trading at your own risk.

you have a crystal ball for price, now?

so the sentiment is slowly shifting -- short term bottom?

-===-

and we're off...

-===-

this is a bit too fast...

yeah weekends are usually pretty boring

awake yet?



i'm sick and tired of taking abuse, but no praise. i hope you TA-naysayers who wrote off my analysis because it was 'obvious' that we were going straight to $50 buy at the top of this minibull.

see? you're still simply writing off my work. this is why i asked you not to comment, because your opinions are clear, and the sarcasm isn't necessary.

i ask for neither praise nor abuse. but one without the other is not honest.

bearish wedge coming to a close right now. midnight dump?

4-hour scale:

-===-

wedges are usually reversal signals, the last wedge was an exception. i tend to try to identify the patterns and then use other data to determine the directionality. William's Oscillator suggests short-term overbought, poising for a slight correction:

-===-

10-day hourly scale



-===-

also, depth on bitcoinity has a bearish bias.

the volume pattern is there, and how does the second point invalidate the wedge?

i agree with zenmario. 'market manipulation' is usually just large players performing their best action given market conditions. it's just as 'fair' as smaller sums attempting similar tricks on smaller scales.

haha aren't triangles awesome?

wall's gone though... PANIC?

the daily wedge is complete....

yeah, that sure seemed like heavy-handed manipulation -- the wall disappeared moments after we broke $120 to see a short selloff (M's coins?).

the funny thing, though, is that it completed the bearish wedge shape... it makes me wonder about the relationship between large players and standard methods of TA.

bid/ask spread looking extremely bullish. a significant number of asks in the the $120 region have vacated in the last hour.

doubt it, this movement just completed a still-bearish wedge.

i don't put much stock in it. the standing orders have less and less of an influence on the market the further you get from the current price point, because bluffing is low cost without the risk of your 'fake' wall being filled.

also, i try to determine points of resistance from direct price history analysis rather than walls in the order book. from my experience, there is usually a wall at a 'real' support/resistance, but the relationship isn't two-ways. just because there is a wall, doesn't mean it is a real support/resistance.

basically, i ignore it for the most part. reading the tide-like ebb and flow of the spread near the price point is minimally useful for anticipating micro-term movements, but beyond that it isn't good data for analysis, in my experience.

great rendering of the triangle that confirms my suspicions of an imminent correction/downward breakout.

it's easier to see on this scale: [taken approx. 12 hours ago]

-===-



-===-

we're just hitting that red line, the marked upper bound of the (yellow) triangle.

these things are like magic

that high is very obviously an outlier.

the process of drawing the 'correct' triangle is as follows: identify the possible top and bottom trendlines with the greatest number of points of contact, disregarding outliers. we can even disregard the highs that break robust (multi-point) trendlines because that itself is evidence that they are outliers, based on the theories of triangle consolidation patterns.

in the picture above, there are 4 possible robust lines, all with 2 points of contact (the minimum for a unique line). i've only drawn 3, can you see the other? hint: what if you assume that the lowest price points of the two recent green bottoms are outliers?

as you can see, there are many possible triangles. determining which is the best fit is a messy process that i'm still refining.

if that was difficult to parse, the idea is that the greater the number of points of contact, the more robust the trendline is. this is because, as frozen pointed out, any line at all can be drawn across one point, two points is enough to define an arbitrary unique line, but three points is a 'coincidence', or in statistics terms, a correlation.

i admit that the lines above only have 2 points of contact. the evidence for their robustness is in the price movement right now.

since the top of your channel is determined only by the slope of the bottom line, which is solely determined by two points of data (both of which are extremes and which qualify as outliers), i'm not sure how robust this model is. the possible confounding scenarios are as follows:

scenario 1 (bearish, dark grey, less deviant, more likely): the deviance of the outliers caused you to underestimate the slope of the channel, and this consolidation is a decision point where we may either correct downward or break through.

scenario 2 (bullish, light grey, more deviant, less likely): the deviance of the outliers caused you to underestimate the slope of the channel, and this latest price action is a bullish breakout.



http://s16.postimg.org/un1muboz9/channel.png

===

regardless, always stress test your models!

--arepo

interesting -- the price action seems to suggest that scenario 2 was correct after all...

--arepo

i find the method which you use to draw channel bounds both arbitrary and weak in terms of model robustness...

the people who are dumping now are the ones who bought coins before we took off and are taking profits (out of the pockets of those who bought coins during the rally itself).

list of things (partially logically sequential order) that ought to have been implicitly understood from my post but apparently were not:

a) these traders may be content with the profits they have made, and simply have reached their own price point (daytraders, as adam suggests)

b) these traders may not be bullish enough to see $900 as a viable short-term target.

c) these traders are pricing in their bearish sentiment by taking profits now, preferably before other doubtful, impatient traders do the same, which creates a feedback loop which can prevent us from reaching $900 at all.

d) mutual knowledge of (c) and a short-term bearish sentiment causes the price to correct slightly and stabilise slightly underneath $900.

e) most traders think they will not make money by putting up a sell order around $900.

f) feedback loop continues.

i don't mean to be condescending but it seemed silly to ask why everybody didn't park their sell orders at $900. it's almost a tautology to say that it is because many traders apparently did not think that we would see that price in the short-term and decided to take profits while they could. the quoted list is a brief explanation of the kind of feedback loop that describes the game-theoretic competition that drives the actions of most market participants, in all price environments. if you don't understand this then you don't understand a fundamental aspect of price behavior, and it was summed up in the phrase "profit-taking".

--arepo

i applaud you for your keen eye. this is the basis of fractal analysis, an umbrella term for Elliot-Wave-style analysis. unfortunately for your prediction, the oscillator at the bottom shows good evidence that the market conditions were significantly different when the crash happened than at this point in our present rally.

if it weren't for that, however, i'd consider that bearish evidence indeed. i've used self-similarities i have found to great effect when combined with other indicators. the amazing part is that it even works at wildly different scales!

--arepo

yes, it will be an interesting chart to revisit around that time to compare to see if market conditions are ripe. the 20 day timespan, frighteningly enough, coincides with the capitulation event that my bearishest model, as well as a colleague's is predicting.

--arepo

wtf is this? are we rabid dogs? i just made as much as i made in the previous 9-day period in the last hour not efficient in the slightest, guys. prepare for some serious profit-taking at the end of this ride

sometimes i believe the whole bit about speculators enhancing liquidity and such but other times i think it's a load of shit and all of this volatility is greed and fear manifested. good job newbs

not sure what you mean. the bolded statement should have made it clear that i was in proper position for this -- it in no way took me by surprise. i'm quite pleased with the profits, actually however, we are far above the trendline now and we're going to pay for it later.

profit-taking is different than selling. sell high, rebuy $10 lower, and you can squeeze so much out of a good, foolish, monday morning rally like this one.

tsk tsk you greedy mofos and your irrational behavior and your market inefficiencies that are lining our pockets

edit: wow, i've just noticed it isn't even monday! it used to be, in the old days, this kind of thing only happened when people's wire transfers rolled in at the start of the week. a weekend rally is a strange thing..

you've got me there. a bit low on sleep and high on caffeine. this kind of price action makes it feel like a monday, i'll tell you that

profit-takers will wait until the bid spread thickens, or else there is too much slippage to take good profit anyway.

as i did you... the buying pressure is immense, the bids filled in in no time at all.

yeah this is parroted way too much. news strengthens or mitigates trends, doesn't make them. we were doomed to crash when we decided to make tens of thousands of percent gains in a single year

--arepo

i hear you, this whole thing does indeed reek of he-who-shall-not-be... er.. Matthew.

but, not being involved, im prepared for a good show either way

LOL'd hard

seriously, it wasn't even a dump, it was just traders inexorably tracing a consolidation pattern. it didn't even break the main support. it is likely the first leg of a downward breakout but who wasn't expecting that?

yeah that was f*ed up. it's kinda nice to see gox still goxing though, and working with bitstamp for once

triangles are extremely useful and anticipatory. i suggest you learn a little more about the methods you're speaking against.

ohhhh gox has been goxing along for quite some time now.. the only option is to get out.

maybe. we just got a bearish crossover on 6-hour stamp data.

welp the bottom fell right out of that one

no.

guys... this is what happens when we go parabolic above a trendline after a bubble. the same thing happened in April-May.

i hope all of the newer traders who were confused as to why i was unsettled by this weekends rally, and the multiple warnings of "we'll pay for this later" understand now.

haha you're obviously not a merchant trying to actually use bitcoin as a currency, or anything like that

like i said, sometimes i believe the crap about speculators being good for a market, but then again this bullshit happens with frightening regularity...

i'm not sure either. they look bad because what just happened was bad. there was prior warning though.

it is sinusoidal. not necessary a technical name from the trading world, but it can be modeled with the sine function. why do you ask? it is rather pretty isn't it?

not after all of that time spent in the overbought zone. we'll likely "double-dip". generally speaking, a crossover of the midline is also an important signal for oscillators.

haven't we broken below your green "trend" line, anyway?

yeah, the newbs need to stop going around finding news to justify price movements. market forces are generally much more powerful on the mid-term scale anyway. what we're seeing is a healthy mid-term correction to a very large bulltrap. this shouldn't be news to anyone, although i know many didn't believe it when it was mentioned on the way up.


don't worry about it. this is an illusion generated by forumites trying to justify movements after-the-fact with news.

--arepo

haha it's a little trickier than that, but as i have posted elsewhere, if the bubble paradigm holds then we will definitely see prices no lower than $450 and likely see prices no lower than $600.

April-May of this past year? that was when my methods finally started working consistently i wrote up a price report to great avail and my customers were very satisfied. i, myself, made 350% returns during the course of that period.

i will concede that my work before that time period was very error-prone, however. i've been following bitcoin for 2.5 years and have been improving steadily along the way. do you have any specific qualms about my current analysis?

semantic arguments aside, i only call it a bulltrap because it is clear that the recent price gains were unsustainable and liable to be retraced in the coming weeks.

well i apologize for the miscommunication then, it is a matter of different time scales.

having been around for so long, i think you might be remembering when i was a bear around October-November 2012, in the runup to the April bubble. that was a particularly wrong call, but then again i have learned a lot since then. not meaning to be confrontational, but when you make claims like the one you just did the onus probandi is on you, and i'd appreciate it if you at least linked to some of my allegedly questionable work. i'm certainly not going to go digging just to defend my reputation from an offhanded comment..

not even that being wrong invalidates one's trustworthiness. showing a resistance to learning from one's mistakes is another story.

--arepo

i just want to thank everybody involved in this thread for contributing to my sentiment measurements. you're all so honest and excitable and treat wall-watching like a true sport.

xD that was a really good one.. thanks for giving me a good laugh at myself haha

i have to admit that the post you quoted was a little sarcastic

i don't know about you, but i've been able to play this market pretty damn well, and i'm a complete fool

that being said, i'm sure the real experts, that is the ones who have no need to post here at all, are more than fine.

uh... never?

they're historical bid/ask spreads with the time axis going into the figure in the perceived third dimension.

are you familiar with 2-dimensional bid/ask spreads?

forget about the news. we're still trapped in an ascending triangle consolidation pattern. until we break above $950 or below the ascending support, we're not going anywhere. we're running out of space, though... tomorrow should be interesting

lawl @ triangle trying to break out on nighttime volume

be patient guys, one more tiny swing down then breakout in the morning

okay, okay, i'll give you my targets, but only because it's such short term

my model predicts:

a) breakout upwards out of the present ascending triangle to the resistance at $875 - $880 (hard to tell because the $875 low on the 12-hour scale looks like an outlier)

b) this breakout will form a bearish wedge, continuing for another 12-hour period

c) bearish wedge will break down and retest the $775 - $780 support

here's a (rough) diagram of the smallest possible range (movements could be $5 to $10 outside of this range without breaking the model):

===

(price @ bitstamp)


http://i.imgur.com/vg9c7Kv.png

===

happy swing trading!

--arepo

im actually surprised by this buying pressure... the triangle is just about out of space on gox and threatening to blow, if there is enough volume.

oh geez the hubris is back.. i guess that explains the buying pressure

just trying to anticipate the movement, as usual. i don't care much about which way, especially on these scales. i'm just having fun swing trading, which is much harder to do, by design. it's like quantum mechanics -- the randomness becomes more and more apparent the further in you zoom.

everybody stay calm, we're right on track



http://i.imgur.com/9lQPqF6.png

just tracing out a nice bullish consolidation... see you at the top of the wedge!

--arepo

well, before everybody started flipping a shit, the picture looked like this:


but now, who knows? right? GHASH COULD BE DOUBLE SPENDING AS WE SPEAK dun dun dunnn...

am i doing it right, guys? the whole panic thing?

--arepo

in all seriousness, i do recognize that it's a major issue, but i'm confident in the bitcoin community as a whole and the incentives built into the protocol. there is far too much at stake for miners to really be that oblivious and shortsighted to simply not reorganize themselves in order to SAVE BITCOIN (!), and even if they don't, as many have pointed out, outside of some third-party conspiracy against the project, GHASH isn't going to sabotage their own reputation and profits -- the incentives just don't line up.

that being said, the alternating waves of panic and euphoria in this thread are almost frightening in their magnitude...

--arepo

i understand this much, that there are a lot of people who have interests that simply don't intersect the interests of the bitcoin community, who are involved by proxy in this or other ways. what i don't see, is how that would translate into an interest to sabotage the project.

while the ramifications of their actions might set the stage for that particular pool to sabotage the project, there still needs to be a malicious party to actually carry out the act. what you're saying is perhaps we cannot avoid a 51% situation in the short term because the incentives to prevent this are broken, but if GHash won't try to attack the blockchain, while the pool will become a target for anyone who does, i don't think anything terrible will happen immediately, and hopefully the savvy members of the community will have enough time to orchestrate a reorganization of the mining sector.

even if the obliviousness of speculators involved in cex.io really does result in a tragedy of the commons scenario, the returns are self-limiting. if they threaten the integrity of the whole project, no one profits, and the scheme collapses. i doubt bitcoin will be utterly destroyed, or even close, at this point, and so the worst that could happen would be a short period of blockchain instability that will be resolved after the panic dissolves the mining majority.

that being said, i really do not feel i know enough about the technical side of bitcoin to be sure that my understanding is accurate in this case. do the above arguments sound reasonable? from what i understand, we as a community should be able to handle this with little difficulty.

--arepo

both gox and stamp are tracing out the same ascending triangle formation, so i don't think the direction of the small movements within these bounds are very significant, correlated or otherwise.


yes, the large volume on the last movement down within the consolidation pattern threw a number of 2-hour indicators bearish, which is of slight concern to me, as it could very well invalidate the model i posted above. it has instilled doubts at the very least and caused me to reevaluate the risk of my position.


here i have to disagree with you, in that even though we are resting on this support i think the chances of continuing the uptrend after this are very slim. the larger picture still suggests that we need more capitulation from the bubble pattern before we can really see sustained growth, and this looks very much like a mid-term top formation. if you look a page back or so in this thread, the model im following is actually not bullish at all i'm just swing-trading right now and i believe the very next movement is a small breakout up into a bearish wedge.


interesting! you are bearish short-term, bullish mid-term, and i am just the opposite! i appreciate the dialogue, and i guess we shall see

--arepo

doubt we'll get there at all. migrations are already happening if /r/bitcoin is any indication.

well if you can't tell that this TA isn't very serious by context, you've got more serious problems than news-panic

that being said, it still isn't clear whether or not the sell-off was "caused" by the news, or merely exacerbated by it.

i'm aware of this, blitz, and i definitely agree with you. that was rather the point i was making, in response to medialab's idea that the TA is not relevant because all of the volatility is "based on news".

i've been trying to remind the newer folks that the news doesn't affect the price the way they think it affects the price...

--arepo

if we relieve all of this selling pressure without actually breaking into a new low, this could be a very bullish sign short-term. the volume associated with this move is pretty significant and all it's doing so far is demonstrating the strength of the $860/$780 (gox/stamp) support.

the outcome is still fuzzy short-term, but it doesn't look good for the coming week, that's for sure. i'm still expecting a bearish formation up to $875 +/- $10 on stamp before we break under the short-term bottom, but good call on the most recent move down. it's hard to make intraday calls better than chance, and so my focus is usually on risk management, and while i did take a small loss i quickly recouped it and more with a slight re-arrangement of my position as well

--arepo

i know this seems really strange, but it's just an upwards breakout, right on time

the price goes up, the price goes down -- you can't explain that! /oreilly

what are you saying?

i do remember this call now, actually, and i'm still a little puzzled why that particular triangle didn't break out. i've noticed that if the breakout time corresponds with a natural low in volume, like the middle of the night, or the weekend, it can affect the model. i've also come to understand better the stochastic manner in which smaller triangles break into bigger triangles but continue consolidating, a behavior i did not fully understand at the time, and was just beginning to model.

i just tried to go through my posts so i could dig it up for accountability (no one's right 100% of the time ), but i can't seem to find it. i hope my concession here, at least, is enough to make peace with you, seleme, on this matter. i would appreciate it if you didn't hold poor calls i made six months ago against my work now.

--arepo

what are you, from the 1950's?

we need to see some serious volume either tonight or early morning tomorrow or this "bullish" breakout is looking very bearish indeed...

thought i was clear enough, but let me try. even though we broke out of the price range of the triangle consolidation pattern, we didn't see a volume spike. this could be a false breakout, which might suddenly reverse on high volume, or we broke out into a larger consolidation pattern like a rising wedge, which would also be bearish.

basically, unless we see some high volume buying pressure soon, these prices are likely not going to last.

i'm thinking it's a wedge. (diagram slightly outdated)

--arepo

sorry for the lack of context.

===

@BITSTAMP


http://i.imgur.com/tRJqA3p.png

===

in order to confirm a "breakout" from a triangle consolidation pattern, we need to see a volume spike that is at least as large as the largest volume inside of the shape. we still see decreasing volume, which suggests we are still consolidating, meaning that the market still has not decided a direction in which to move. the bearish scenario would be a retest of the $765 low.

i have a feeling this curious low-volume "breakout" has something to do with the fact that we have not broken out of the triangle consolidation pattern on gox yet.


i'm going to start calling you T "unsubstantiated claims" Stuart. i think its quite becoming

--arepo

ah yes, i see. that is bullish indeed. the decoupling of the markets is a strange and confounding thing, though. i'd say it's certainly less bullish than a proper breakout on gox and stamp, as well. and of course, this is only bullish micro-term, because the bearish wedge is still a possibility, depending on price action today. if we can't break above the resistance we're currently pushing, we could still retest Wednesday's low.

i wasn't taking it personally, at all

a brief overview of your posts in the last three weeks shows that volume is one of your least-discussed data, actually. you prefer it far less than news, of course, which must be a superior trading signal based on your confidence in your various assertions.

as for a 'last leg down' in reference to the repercussions of the December crash, i wouldn't rule it out just yet...

--arepo

decisive breakout on gox! 4-day highs just reached on both gox and stamp. just waiting for morning volume, i suppose... this is exciting

i agree that government and bureaucracy is in a large part obstructing some of the natural restructuring that would otherwise occur in the free market in today's stratified society. however, it is obvious that a paradigm shift occurred around 1970 when productivity, employment rates, and wages decoupled. i don't think it is a coincidence that this lines up with a shift towards automative replacement of many jobs, in both unskilled and skilled labor.

this coupled with the severe contraction of the economy in 2008 and the jobless recovery since has produced and maintained feedback loops manifesting themselves as rapid stratification in both income and wealth distribution in the US and the world: wage suppression, natural monopolization and other effects of economies of scale, globalization of economies corresponding to globalization of inequality, and large profits for the business and financial elite corresponding to large negative externalities for everyone else. each of these items could be expanded into an entire thesis, but i won't go into more detail. the point is that each of these things are independent feedback loops that support and accelerate wealth inequality.

these issues are not directly traceable to meddling governments but may be exacerbated by them. it is particularly misguided to place the blame on governments when these problems are endemic to the apparatus as it stands now that we call Modern Capitalism. it is difficult for some to accept that the sacred cow of "capitalism" may have some natural tendencies towards non-optimal states, but the truth is that the free market is not an ideal, it is a thing that exists in practice, in many forms. some forms may be more desireable than others, and i certainly do not think the state of the apparatus as it exists now is desireable.

--arepo

unfortunately, the data has shown that this is not true anymore, and hasn't been for more than 4 decades.


can you demonstrate how the Bretton Woods System would have the aforementioned effect on productivity and wages? cum hoc ergo propter hoc is a logical fallacy.


there is very much so such a thing as a natural monopoly and if you disagree you are at odds with basic economics. you also conveniently forgot to address every other item on that list. there is no "free market" ideal, there is only the apparatus that exists, and the present apparatus rewards huge negative externalities and is perpetuating and accelerating wealth inequality, both things which render it unsustainable in the long term. high rates of unemployment coupled with wage suppression creates poverty traps worse than the welfare state. we're not talking about "Capitalism" or "The Free Market", we're talking about global capitalism as it exists today, and the global market. the ills are most certainly not the sole fault of governments, and scapegoating them in this way is a dangerous misdirection away from the real issues endemic in the apparatus that are contributing to the suffering of millions...

in other words, i don't care about your lofty Randian free market ideals. while capitalism may be "the best solution we can aspire to", and that would be hard to disagree with, it is also clear that our present form of global capitalism is suffering from a huge amount of inefficiencies, many of which cannot be attributed to meddling governments. how can we reconcile these two things? i have no clue, but we've first got to get our heads out of our asses and stop worshipping the sacred cow long enough to think critically about why the apparatus is failing at efficiently distributing resources.

--arepo

yes, i can understand how the effects on the purchasing power of the dollar drove the real value of wages down, but does that explain the decoupling of productivity and employment rates, as well?

let's move this away from generalities, which are all well-hashed arguments on both sides, and focus on the specifics that we see in the global market today.

for instance, how is the poverty trap created by Walmart-esque wage suppression coupled with high unemployment rates attributable to governments? how is the large environmental externality of shipping and manufacturing attributable to governments?

the short answer is: they're not. but i'm sure you'll give me a longer answer

low volume is not necessarily bearish, but we're sure as hell not going to be able to break above the mid-term resistance on this slow boat.

your assumptions are showing

rapid loss of depth on both the bid and ask side from the bitstamp orderbook in the past hour.... what's going on traders finally moving orders that had been parked since the beginning of the painfully low volatility?

courtesy of bitcoinity

a WILD CONJECTURE has appeared!

pretty sure it was just traders shifting the position of their orders in response to the first significant price action in almost a week. i forgot how far you guys in this thread will extrapolate and exaggerate any innocent data...

not to scare you, but what if the price never goes back up? it's certainly a possibility that you must consider.

then you have something to learn about price movement. not only is a $15 movement in a 6-hour period the largest range we have seen in about a week, the volume associated with the movement is the largest we've seen in that same time frame. this makes it significant in magnitude if only in comparison to the watching-paint-dry-caliber price behavior this past week. it is also significant in that it may herald a steady increase in volatility from here on out after that painfully quiet consolidation.

no big words necessary. $635-$620 is a range of $15, in 6 hours. this is the largest range in any 6-hour period in the last 7 or so days. the associated volume is also greater than any 6-hour period in the last 7 or so days. the move in itself is not a significant price move, but it carries significance in relation to the price environment. but i guess it doesn't matter much to someone who's so damn rich they can't help but post their holdings any chance they get

also, as if on cue, a massive askwall just appeared at $630.

-facepalm-

we're mincing words at this point. it is not a "SIGNIFICANT MOVE" as far as bitcoin price action is concerned, but it carries information in the short-term. it strengthens the case for a movement downward before we break above the mid-term resistance. you may disagree, but try not to sound so categorically correct when you do.

yeah it seems many traders around here don't understand the idea of keeping ahead of the market. chasing the market is more obvious, but obviously less profitable

it also doesn't require empirical methods of constructing a workable signalling theory like the one i outlined in my last post. but then again, many traders here don't even "believe in" TA at all

do you believe your own generalities? or do you simply make a habit of hindsight rationalizations that make it seem to yourself like you're an infinite spout of wisdom?

in the historical data sideways consolidation has been bullish for Bitcoin more often than not.

then i misunderstood you. all i mean to say is, i don't think the data supports your assertion.

caught me by complete surprise, i didn't think the first small move down to $620 was significant at all

it's always beautiful to see triangle consolidation patterns on such small scales... the self-similarity in the price function is striking.

apologies for the patronizing tone. i was just correcting an error in judgment where i saw one. i tend to be more pedantic than is socially acceptable sometimes, but you'll always get detailed explanations that way 


sure did i hope my subscribers did too; the newsletter i issued just yesterday morning called for a bounce off of the support at $605.

haha stop with your objective TA! it's scaring the bulls

you make a decent point, TERA, but most of these formulations are working (whether consciously or not) with the other magic assumption that BTC prices never return to less than the previous ATH after a new ATH, a paradigm which similarly can be violated at any future point but which has held up so far...

LOL @ lying to the nubs to pump litecoin...

having just started to post in this thread again with frequency, i take personal offense to that

and there you have the fractal nature of price... it's almost unbelievable, isn't it?

self-similarity in the price function is a measurable and consistent property. numerology is pareidolia.

yes, it's quite striking. making predictions based on fractal analysis is a little trickier though, because the structure is the same but the detail is still stochastic.

i guess you're short?

and only fools, i suppose... or we're the fools. time will tell.

i think the problem was that the bid side depth was too shallow, so sellers were waiting for a better deal with less slippage to unload. hope you didn't already buy back in TERA

+1

this is a demonstrable truth. imagine if there were a single button that, when pushed, launched all of the nukes in the US simultaneously. the amount of security required to render the existence of such a device safe in any respect would be extraordinary. this is why concentrated power is dangerous, not because the controllers of such power are necessarily "evil", but because the risk of actors with divergent interests gaining control of such power is too great. this is the magic of bitcoin and any other decentralized system -- it remains safe as long as honest actors hold majority over dishonest actors. there is no hub to seize and corrupt. with no king to assassinate, a greater peace and stability is achievable.

it's called brand loyalty, and it's human nature. give up on trying to sell the idea here, it is exactly like trying to explain bitcoin to the somethingawful crowd back in 2012. not saying ripple is or isn't viable, but if XRP is not a pump&dump then there's little incentive for you to try to get more people involved, anyway. if it's destined for success don't waste your energy in the meantime just wait for it to become mainstream.

a brief perusal of the past 10 or so pages of this very thread should clearly demonstrate the reason behind Litecoin's current price behavior.

that being said, it is downright fallacious to conclude that Bitcoin speculators toying with the Litecoin exchange rate because of stability on the Bitcoin exchanges reduces the whole project to pump&dump status. it's us, silly

bitcoin broke up & down simultaneously in the last 6h... crazy tall doji candle

not really sure what to make of it...

lagging price is definitely the best way to make money

did you buy at $1200 too?

too many were expecting a drop. the market doesn't like to hand out profits cheap

OT, but it's not that easy

the egg came first if we're talking any old egg. there were plenty of egg-laying creatures long before there were ever any birds at all! if we're discussing chicken vs chicken-egg, we still run into a problem: is a chicken-egg an egg laid by a chicken, or an egg that contains a chicken? many are familiar with the evolutionary story of something not-chicken laying an egg that contains a chicken. but you seem to take for granted that a chicken egg must be laid by a chicken. the egg that contained the chicken does not count as the egg that preceded the chicken?

also, don't tell people not to use idiomatic phrases because they're not scientifically accurate that's not how language works at all.

this is how all trading works it's identical to a game where there are two rooms, A and B, and players move from one, to the hallway in between, to the other. each player's reward is proportional to the number of people who enter room A after him, minus the number of people who leave room A before him, as well as the number of people who enter room B after him, minus the number of people who leave room B before him.

imagine actually playing that game. seems silly, doesn't it? that's what we're doing here, all of us!

--arepo

are you implying that this is problematic because of the "heat island" effect? blacktops heat up because the solar energy is absorbed because of the color and must be dissipated in some form -- that form is heat. solar panels absorb the same energy but effectively convert it into electricity. hence, solar panels would not act like blacktops because of the principle of energy conservation.

--arepo

bid depth on stamp in the $400-$500 region seems to have shrunk considerably in the last 24 hours.

it's called a triangle consolidation pattern. but don't worry, we're just about to break out

i think it's likely that we'll at least retest the last low before moving anywhere else. the recent break under the $530 support is a significant bear signal to me.

you're still assuming that JorgeStolfi @ bitcointalk is actually Jorge Stolfi...

all he said is that you'd change your mind 

sad thing being that no one seems to be

this thread is such a racket these days

why would you lash out like this? from the sound of it, you'd think a little bit of humility would kill the man

lol panic buy on huobi, bitstamp, even LTCUSD -facepalm-

we'll see in a bit if the market actually agrees that this new source is authoritative and the message is significant. we still haven't broken out of the short-term downwards channel on stamp.

coupled with the bearish sentiment and indicators, this is a perfect indication of a solid long squeeze into capitulation which could finally mark the short-term bottom.

will huobi follow? its ticker hasn't even tested its last low yet...

it's neither, but with all the wannabe HODLers who bought in the past 4 months and have seen serious losses, and denial from folks like underdog, we're in for a loooooong squeeeeze.

haha i just meant a long squeeze. like, longs covering their position on the way down, exacerbating the trend.

i did also mean that this could be the tail end of a short-term downtrend and not play out in a massive capitulation event like in the past. a few indicators are showing unprecedented bearish signals, that is, unprecedented in bitcoin price history for this point in the bubble recovery cycle. so this time will likely be a little different than in the past, but certainly not the death of bitcoin

i am a little sad though, because i thought i could profit more from this movement in the litecoin market, but of course it picks now to decouple! i suppose bitcoiners are actually using it to hedge again. these are certainly strange times.

my position is older than that. also, profits are proportional to percentage change. litecoin volatility has consistently been larger with respect to the base price on most days. i think it might still follow when huobi decides to...

in other news, the bidwall at stamp is trying to look super menacing, but until the buying pressure seriously picks up this slow grind is bound to continue.

anyone who went long after the $530 breach is paying too much attention to "fundamentals" and not enough attention to technicals, imho

edit: @billyjoeallen, stats say many more longs than shorts

if we break under that support, then yes, that would be a mid-term bearish signal.

the spread is unreal right now... ask side so thin that bitstamp's last hour of volume (3.5k BTC) could send the price up to $530! yet the selling pressure is sustained and the buying pressure is absent.

if the bottom fishers buy now, who will have fiat left when we break below $440?

what a beautiful bulltrap...

i had a short position at around $450 that i was about to close as it took off, figuring we would make some temporary price gains and i could profit on the way up as well as short from a better price, but as i was strategically placing bids near the bottom support it broke the triangle early and it was not worth closing at a loss. damn shame

this is consolidation, not a rally... you should take off those bull-colored glasses

do timescales mean nothing to you? we made a higher high on the 1-day scale. not saying that this bullish price action is not significant, but since we've been making lower highs for the past 4 months, i'm pretty sure your statement is premature.

longer time-scale indicators point to a downtrend that is gaining momentum. there is some divergence on the shorter time frames, but that is what bulltraps in a bear market look like.

take a look at the daily-scale CMF and MACD:


http://bitcoincharts.com/charts/bitstampUSD#rg150zigDailyztgSzm1g10zm2g25zxzi1gCMFzi2gMACDzvzl

only today's data point is diverging, and today's candle is still premature. so, again, we've got countertrend action, but only on the daily scale, sub-daily if we consider a possible retracement in the next 12 or so hours. i would close that long soon, if i were you. you've already made some nice profit on it.

this is not at all how technical analysis works...