Wall Observer

[chriswilmer]

interesting, but is price (y axis) scale invariant? (suppose the chart were expressed in yuan, would price stick around longer around bands led by the same digits?). the law says this phenomenon will tend to happen, irrespective of measurement unit, with datasets that cover several orders of magnitude: "To be sure of approximate agreement with Benford's Law, the data has to be approximately invariant when scaled up by any factor up to 10. A lognormally distributed data set with wide dispersion has this approximate property." i am not sure we have such a dataset (certainly not for that rainbow graph).

it's all well and good but as we all know, bitcoin could stay glued at $800 for six months.

or not.

It is unit invariant.

 

[Mengerian]

It seems like the price is following the "punctuated equilibrium" pattern similar to June-Sept 2016. The pattern looks like a series of sudden price adjustments followed by a sort of damped oscillation converging at various levels. Summer 2016 price converged to ~660, then ~570, then a final convergence in-between to ~610 before transitioning to a slow exponential rise.

After the recent sudden price changes, price first converged to around 900, then to ~830.

The difference this time is the time period of the punctuations. Last summer the punctuations were about 5 weeks apart, now they seem to be about 5 days apart.

This makes sense, because as soon as a pattern becomes apparent, we can expect traders to anticipate it, trying to front-run the price movements. This has the affect of speeding up , then eventually destroying, the pattern.

 

[ChartBuddy]

https://bitco.in/forum/posts/33319

 

[adamstgbit]

Reading between the lines:
chineses exchanges have a lot of work ahead of them to be compliant with PBOC. new regulations are likely to make trading btc on these exchanges require all your info. leverage trading will require an overhaul to comply with regulation.

its unclear if market will overreact like last time.

the news today:
also it would appear, Mr. Ding, isn't going to get compensation on his max leverage long at the top being liquidated due to the exchange's inability to service all login requests during extreme volatility.

IMO all this news has created a monstrous bear trap, with nearly 100% chance of closing once things are all said and done.

 

[79b79aa8]

western traders have been complaining about unreliability of volume data from chinese exchanges since day 1. more transparency on that front is welcome.

ii'd much, much rather have some minuscule proportion of the chinese population / financial system using bitcoin for legal business purposes through regulated exchanges, than at most a few thousand gamblers playing leverage games.

if it takes a while, let it take a while. we want mature markets across the board, not the wild wild east.

 

[adamstgbit]

market is surprisingly bullish, after yet another "chain ban" earlier today
I foresee strong resistance ahead, based on chain banning leverage.
short to mid term seems bearish enough to load up on ammo.
could be wrong. bear trap might close here and now.

 

[Mengerian]

Surprisingly, the chart still seems to be following the accelerated "punctuated equilibrium" pattern. Now on the third damped oscillation since the crash, looks to be converging just below $900.

If it keeps up as an accelerated version of the summer 2016 pattern, we can expect the convergence to a stable level for a couple more days. Then around the end of the weekend, it should transition to "slow exponential" again, lasting for 10-14 days before breaking out of the pattern (accelerated from the 10-14 week "slow exponential" through Oct-Dec 2016).

 

[freetrader]

If you're wondering what's wrong, it's probably this

https://www.europol.europa.eu/newsroom/news/global-conference-countering-money-laundering-and-misuse-of-digital-currencies

 

[adamstgbit]

i'm hoping for a bit of a drop, 860 or maybe a new low 720ish, really want another buy opportunity
support is still very strong, blasting past ATH on the news that chinese exchange are fully compliant with PBOC seem very likely.

 

[79b79aa8]

If you're wondering what's wrong, it's probably this

https://www.europol.europa.eu/newsroom/news/global-conference-countering-money-laundering-and-misuse-of-digital-currencies

"At the end of the conference, participants agreed upon a set of conclusions which included: [...] Take action against digital currency mixers/tumblers, designed to anonymise transactions, which burdens the work of law enforcement agencies to detect and trace suspicious transactions."

Which legal principle could be invoked to prevent a person from tumbling up her coins / mixing up a bunch of data? (Without going into the question of whether such prevention could be enforced). Would it hold up in European courts? I don't think it would in the US.

 

[yrral86]

"At the end of the conference, participants agreed upon a set of conclusions which included: [...] Take action against digital currency mixers/tumblers, designed to anonymise transactions, which burdens the work of law enforcement agencies to detect and trace suspicious transactions."

Which legal principle could be invoked to prevent a person from tumbling up her coins / mixing up a bunch of data? (Without going into the question of whether such prevention could be enforced). Would it hold up in European courts? I don't think it would in the US.

Like other types of money laundering, it would likely be added as an additional charge when someone has already been caught earning elicit proceeds. Trying to hide those proceeds will earn you extra time.

 

[79b79aa8]

Like other types of money laundering, it would likely be added as an additional charge when someone has already been caught earning elicit proceeds. Trying to hide those proceeds will earn you extra time.

OK, but the directive says to take action againt tumblers per se, not people who've already been caught doing something illegal and use such services.

But even in the second case, I don't think it would stand legal challenge in US. At bottom, you are exchanging an old set of keys (a string of characters) for a new set of keys (another string of characters). In the name of what principle of law can this be prevented?

It's like reasoning: cash is used for illegal activity, so let's make cash illegal. No. What principle of law can you invoke to to prohibit people to trade things for bits of paper or bits of paper for things? You can, however, stop emitting cash.

We've got a solution for that.

 

[adamstgbit]

 

[Mengerian]

Interesting that the price is still bouncing around in the high 800 / low 900s. For a while it looked like maybe it was going to transition early to slow rise mode, but now it's back to consolidation/sideways. Maybe the market wants more time to settle at gradually lower volatility before transitioning back to upward price drift.

 

[arandy]

Something is in the air
It's a bit early to say but i think we are going to be in the 1000 dollars by next week. I'm no expert but if China goes steady and up after introducing fees and ditching the fake leverage volume then this should be a strong sign.

 

[79b79aa8]

Still getting used to the fact that a measly 5% rise at this level moves us ~ $50 further.

 

[AdrianX]

Still getting used to the fact that a measly $50 rise isn't as exciting as a $5 rise in early 2013.

 

[Zangelbert Bingledack]

We appear to be back on the exponential trendline that started 1.5 years ago (not the dotted trendline on the chart below, though we may well return to that faster long-term one, with a nice moonshot above it for a while). Very good recovery. Core/BS in a tailspin. All systems go.

 

[PoolMinor]

Perhaps it is time to come to the light side of the force once and for all. That other forum is full of haters and bitches. I do hope that some of you can appreciate my postings in the future and understand that I am a trader and want the price to go up just like most of you here.

 

[AdrianX]

@PoolMinor it's a little very slow but be have Chartbuddy ;-P