Search content
Sort by
Showing 20 of 47 results by BTCdragosfera
⭐ Merited by fillippone (3)
Ho un piccolo suggerimento per gbianchi.
Sul grafico sarebbe possibile introdurre, se non lo rende troppo confusionario, magari usando un colore piallino un pò sfumato, una bella linea orizzontale a 380?
Indicherebbe il valore target per il quale BTC riesce ad avere pari capitalizzazione dell'oro.
Forse l'unica altra linea di capitalizzazione "notevole" sarebbe a 1,900 once (sarebbe vicina al mio valore di lungo periodo), ma non so se vale la pena tracciarla.
La linea però servirebbe a ricordarci sempre che stiamo ragionando in termini di XAU, non di USD.
Sul grafico sarebbe possibile introdurre, se non lo rende troppo confusionario, magari usando un colore piallino un pò sfumato, una bella linea orizzontale a 380?
Indicherebbe il valore target per il quale BTC riesce ad avere pari capitalizzazione dell'oro.
Forse l'unica altra linea di capitalizzazione "notevole" sarebbe a 1,900 once (sarebbe vicina al mio valore di lungo periodo), ma non so se vale la pena tracciarla.
La linea però servirebbe a ricordarci sempre che stiamo ragionando in termini di XAU, non di USD.
cosi' mi pare non troppo invasivo
Voi ragazzi pensate questo e' il mio primo rodeo come dicono in America.
1) Ho gia' fatto modelli usando la curva logistica. Dal 2013, ha inventato l'acqua calda complimenti. https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/21pujs/bitcoin_compared_with_metcalfes_and_zipfs_law/
2) Non e' un modello ma un numero infinito. Qundi Occam's si sta rotolando nella tomba.
3) Non c'e' evidenza che siamo vicino a saturazione. In fatti, usando propieta' di network ho dimostrato che la saturazione e' molto lontana, ordini di magnitudine lontana.
https://medium.com/quantonomy/modeling-bitcoin-growth-with-network-theory-c476b91fdd20
4) Nello stesso articolo dimostro che gli indirizzi e il prezzo sono power laws cominciando con equazioni completamente neutrali (incluse logistic model). La power law e' il modello migliore da un punta di vista fisico, statistico ed empirico.
5) Bitcoin non si comporta come una tecnologia ma un network sociale che e' stato dimostrato molte volte si comportano come power laws.
6) In fatti la caratteristica fundametal di una power law e' la invarianza di scala. Ho dimostrato usando molti test diversi che Bitcoin e' scale invariant.
7) Il modello logistico non e' scale invariant (qundi fallisce questi test) e si vede bene non fitta gli anni cruciali all'inizio. Solo la power law lo fa'.
Oro o dollari non importa. Ho fatto gia cento posts dove dimostro che non importa se usi oro, argento, dollari, yen, sono tutte power laws che sono praticamente parallele.E andiamo....Santostasi scansati
Quando, tra 36 anni, la sigmoide avrà raggiunto il 90% della saturazione immagino anche il linguaggio sarà cambiato e la gente che leggerà questo post dirà " questo materiale era Bitcoin puro"
Se lo traduci in inglese e lo posti in giro diventi un personaggio internazionale intervistato in tutti i podcast.
Complimenti, davvero.
Quando, tra 36 anni, la sigmoide avrà raggiunto il 90% della saturazione immagino anche il linguaggio sarà cambiato e la gente che leggerà questo post dirà " questo materiale era Bitcoin puro"
Se lo traduci in inglese e lo posti in giro diventi un personaggio internazionale intervistato in tutti i podcast.
Complimenti, davvero.
Beh intanto grazie a te che mi hai fatto tornare in mente questo progettino che avevo in mente una decina di anni fa,
ma la tua "battuta" sull'oro mi ha davvero acceso faro su cosa usare come sistema di riferimento.
A pensarci adesso, mi pare strano che non sia il modo "standard" di ragionare, prezzare il BTC in oro
e "marginalizzare" le Fiat come strumento di misura.
Questo e' vero Bitcoin Pensiero, come dici tu, anzi forse il concetto piu' importante espresso in tutto l'articolo.
Per la storia di diventare un personaggio, lo considero un disvalore. La smania di diventare personaggi
fa fare scelte discutibili
Questo e' Santostasi.
Peccato che ho usato il modello logistic in uno dei miei primi modelli. Perche' lo ho abbandonato? Perche' non funziona. La powe law e' cento volte meglio. Dollaro, oro, non importa, si ottiene essattamente lo stesso risultato da un punto di vista delle proprieta' di scala.
Eccolo qui:
https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/21pujs/bitcoin_compared_with_metcalfes_and_zipfs_law/
Used the empirical data of unique addresses as a function of time.
Fitted a logistic model to the data in 1) with only one free variable (number of final users)
Fitted with a linear regression model the data points in a log-log graph with price in the y axis and users in the x axis. Derived a power law with a power if 1.45 by measuring the slope.
Used this power law and the logistic model to predict the price.
Calculated how well the model fits the empirical trend of price vs time and obtained a highly statistical significant value.
Plotted as a comparison what one would obtain using Metcalfe's or Zipf's law. They don't fit very well at all. Bitcoin law is in between these two (power of 1.45).
Niente di originale.
Sigmoidi descritte da Perenod.
Ho gia' usato nel mio articolo nel 2013 il modello logistico. Sei un po' in ritardo amivo mio.
https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/21pujs/bitcoin_compared_with_metcalfes_and_zipfs_law/
Used the empirical data of unique addresses as a function of time.
Fitted a logistic model to the data in 1) with only one free variable (number of final users)
Fitted with a linear regression model the data points in a log-log graph with price in the y axis and users in the x axis. Derived a power law with a power if 1.45 by measuring the slope.
Used this power law and the logistic model to predict the price.
Calculated how well the model fits the empirical trend of price vs time and obtained a highly statistical significant value.
Plotted as a comparison what one would obtain using Metcalfe's or Zipf's law. They don't fit very well at all. Bitcoin law is in between these two (power of 1.45).
Sigmoidi descritte da Perenod.
Ho gia' usato nel mio articolo nel 2013 il modello logistico. Sei un po' in ritardo amivo mio.
https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/21pujs/bitcoin_compared_with_metcalfes_and_zipfs_law/
Used the empirical data of unique addresses as a function of time.
Fitted a logistic model to the data in 1) with only one free variable (number of final users)
Fitted with a linear regression model the data points in a log-log graph with price in the y axis and users in the x axis. Derived a power law with a power if 1.45 by measuring the slope.
Used this power law and the logistic model to predict the price.
Calculated how well the model fits the empirical trend of price vs time and obtained a highly statistical significant value.
Plotted as a comparison what one would obtain using Metcalfe's or Zipf's law. They don't fit very well at all. Bitcoin law is in between these two (power of 1.45).
Un modello logistico del prezzo di Bitcoin.
Autore: @gbianchi 1GbianchiJ6EeBU8ua77719Ur7qwLZVk3x
Revisione 0.4 28/10/2024
Prefazione
Nel corso degli anni sono circolati diversi modelli del prezzo di Bitcoin e
recentemente due sono diventati particolarmente noti: il modello S2F di PlanB [1] e il modello PowerLaw di Santostasi [2]
Senza entrare nel merito della logica alla base di questi modelli, emergono immediatamente due ordini di problemi,
che ne invalidano in modo irrimediabile le fondamenta:
1) i modelli sono riferiti ad una valuta Fiat, solitamente prezzo BTC in USD.
2) I modelli tendono a crescere infinitamente nel tempo, quindi si parte gia' con la certezza che saranno prima o poi invalidati.
Cerchero' in questo articolo di derivare un modello che rimuova questi basilari problemi.
Scelta di un corretto valore di riferimento: l'oro
Nell'impostazione di un modello di prezzo del Bitcoin valido nel tempo, dovremo scegliere un valore di riferimento che possiamo
ritenere ragionevolmente costante e stabile. La scelta di una valuta Fiat come valore di riferimento
espone il modello nel tempo alle potenziali variazioni di suddetta valuta. Tali variazioni possono derivare
da problemi inflattivi, problemi politici, problemi economici del paese emittente della valuta Fiat.
Nel caso del Dollaro Usa, nonostante spesso venga considerato valuta di riferimento negli scambi internazionali, tutti
questi problemi si palesano in modo evidente, quindi sia i problemi di svalutazione per inflazione,
problemi di volatilita' per tensioni politiche ed enormi problemi di sostenibilita' del rapporto debito/pil.
In tal modo nel gia' difficile problema di trovare una modello per il prezzo di Bitcoin, introduciamo anche tutta una serie
di altre variabili che sono totalmente estranee alla dinamica intrinseca del modello, ma piuttosto dipendenti da
una serie di situazioni contingenti agli USA.
Per questo motivo, come suggerito da Plutosky, si seguira' il metodo di utilizzare come valore di riferimento il valore di un'oncia troy d'oro,
ossia l'unita' di misura internazionalmente usata per gli scambi in oro.
L'oro si presta bene ad essere usato come campione di riferimento del valore, in quanto e' sovranazionale, quindi il suo valore non dipende
da situazioni locali politiche ed economiche di un singolo paese, non e' sottoposto a particolari pressione inflattive,
ossia la produzione e' nota e e relativamente costante, ed inoltre e' riconosciuto come sistema di valore da millenni in ogni parte del mondo.
La scelta di questo sistema di riferimento, ossia prezzo di BTC/GOLD Oz t toglie immediatamente dall'equazione tutta una serie di variabili
esterne che potrebbero falsare in modo irreparabile ogni tipo di valutazione di lungo periodo.
Un modello matematico sostenibile: la curva logistica
Un altro problema dei precedenti modelli proposti, deriva dal fatto che usano curve "eternamente crescenti", che sono
quindi ontologicamente errate. Nessun sistema fisico puo' crescere all'infinito, in quanto le risorse fisiche sono
per definizione limitate, e quindi ci devono essere degli "upper bound" verso il quale il fenomeno di crescita deve muoversi
in modo asintotico.
Questo e' un discorso generale che ovviamente vale per qualsiasi tipo di risorsa fisica: dal consumo dei carburanti
fossili (che ad un certo punto finiranno) a qualsiasi fenomeno di espansione di popolazioni viventi (che si dovra' fermare quando tutte le risorse
necessarie alla sopravvivenza saranno terminate) e genericamente valido per qualsiasi fenomeno di espansione con utilizzo di risorse fisiche.
Tale genere di problema e' ben studiato e si riassume in una curva sigmoide chiamata logistica.
Risalgono addirittura al 1838 gli studi di Pierre F. Verhulst sulle crescite logistiche, e da allora sono susseguite una serie
di approfondimenti e perfezionamenti nello studio della crescita delle popolazioni.
E' ovvio che nella progressiva adozione di Bitcoin come mezzo di pagamento universalmente accettato, ci troviamo proprio di fronte
ad un problema di questo genere, ossia la crescita della popolazione che sta usando Bitcoin, e che ci sara' un upper bound, ossia un
momento in cui tutti i possibili utenti saranno stati raggiunti, e quindi il sistema non potra' crescere ulteriormente.
Da questo fenomeno, che viene comunemente denominato "adozione di Bitcoin"; dipende poi il suo valore, in quanto maggiore sara' il numero
di persone che useranno Bitcoin come mezzo di pagamento, maggiore sara' il suo valore in seguito alla legge di Metcalfe [3], e anche in considerazione
del fatto che il numero totale di Bitcoin e' limitato a 21.000.000 di unita'.
Quindi possiamo ritenere una dipendenza diretta del valore di Bitcoin dalla popolazione che lo utilizza.
Esempi di altre risorse crescenti secondo curve logistiche
Nel campo economico l'adozione di praticamente ogni prodotto segue una curva logistica: dal momento dell'immissione sul mercato,
fino al raggiungimento dell'upper bound di utenti raggiungibili da tale prodotto.
Ecco due grafici che rappresentano l'adozione di alcuni prodotti e servizi secondo una curva logistica:
ed eccone un altro piu' dettagliato [4] che mette anche in evidenza iil concetto di "impulso di crescita, ossia il periodo di tempo
che passa dal momento di una penetrazione di mercato al 10% fino al momento del 90% di penetrazione di mercato
Individuazione dell'equazione logistica.
L'analisi matematica ci fornisce diverse forme di equazioni logistiche, le piu' semplici sono quelle totalmente simmetriche che sono nella forma
[5]
In questo caso vi e' un lower bound che e' 0 un upper bound che e' 1 e un punto di flesso che e' alla coordinata (0,0.5)
Ovviamente per il nostro tipo di analisi ci serve una tipo di logistica piu' malleabile, in quanto si deve adattare
a dei vincoli gia' noti:
1) lower bound = 0
2) deve seguire con buona approssimazione il percorso del prezzo BTC/GOLD Oz t fino ad ora
3) upper bound configurabile.
questo tipo di equazioni esiste e si chiamano "logistiche asimmetriche";
la necessita' di logistica asimmetrica deriva dal fatto che i fenomeni naturali non crescono seguendo
una logistica perfetta, ma ovviamente si adattano all'ambiente e la forma finale della sigmoide risulta un po' deformata.
tra le vare forme di logistiche asimmetriche usero' la seguente per la semplicita' di modellazione sul problema in esame:
[6]
In questa logistica si possono impostare 5 parametri, e sono:
LL = Lower Bound
LU = Upper Bound
Ix = X del punto di flesso
S = Slope, pendenza del punto di flesso
c = Fattore di asimmetria.
X = variabile indipendente.
Individuazione Upper Bound.
Individuare un upper bound e' evidentemente il problema piu' difficile.
Esistono diverse stime sull'oro estratto e quello ancora da estrarre. Per evitare di perdere troppo tempo su questo argomento,
usiamo una stima molto approssimativa di 200.000 Tonnellate di oro estratte + 50.000 tonnellate ancora da estrarre. [7]
250.000/31,1035*1000000 sono circa 8.000.000.000 di Oz t di oro totali.
Siccome esistono 21.000.000 di BTC, per avere una parita' di capitalizzazione 1 BTC dovra' valere come 380 Oz t d'oro
Ora fissiamo 4 upper bound, che definiscono i seguenti scenari:
1) Un upper bound "pessimistico" definito Upper bound Arulbero, ove ogni BTC varra' alla fine del processo di adozione 100 Oz t d'oro,
ossia la rete Bitcoin capitalizzera' circa un quarto dell'oro, sostanzialmente un fallimento del progetto Bitcoin, anche se un buon risultato in valore assoluto.
2) Un upper bound "prudenziale" definito Upper bound Gbianchi, ove ogni BTC varra' alla fine del processo di adozione 600 Oz t d'oro,
ossia la rete Bitcoin capitalizzera' il 50% in piu' dell'oro.
3) Un upper Bound "moderatamente ottimistico" definito upper bound Plutosky lo fissiamo a 1100 Oz t d'oro per BTC, ossia la rete Bitcoin capitalizzera' il 200% in piu' dell'oro.
4) Un upper Bound "ottimistico" definito upper bound Fillippone lo fissiamo a 2200 Oz t d'oro per BTC, il doppio del precedente,
un eventuale scenario che si puo' tranquillamente definire di hyperbitcoinization [8]
equazioni finali
Individuati gli upper bound abbiamo tutti gli elementi per risolvere i parametri delle equazioni logistiche finali.
Ricordiamo che gli altri parametri sono un lower bound = 0 e un fitting ottimale con il valore BTC/GOLD Oz t fino ad oggi.
Ricaviamo l'andamento del prezzo BTC/GOLD Oz t come vincolo di fitting ottimale, derivandolo dal
prezzo BTC/USD rapportato al Fxing LBMA GOLD Oz t/USD [9]
quindi otteniamo questi valori per i parametri delle equazioni:
la variabile indipendente x rappresenta in tutti i modelli i giorni trascorsi dal 03/01/2009 (Genesis Block)
Upper bound pessimistico Arulbero
L_L = 0;
L_U = 100;
I_x = 5700;
S = 0.029;
c = -1;
Upper bound prudenziale Gbianchi
L_L = 0;
L_U = 600;
I_x = 8900;
S= 0.068;
c = -20;
Upper bound moderatamente ottimistico Plutosky
L_L = 0;
L_U = 1100;
I_x = 10100;
S = 0.11;
c = -20;
Upper bound ottimistico Fillippone (hyperbitcoinization)
L_L = 0;
L_U = 2200;
I_x = 11400;
S = 0.197;
c = -20;
Inoltre ho anche riparametrizzato la Power Law di Santostasi su BTC Oro Oz t, per avere un confronto
dell'andamento "eternamente crescente" della Power Law con gli andamenti sigmoidi; ecco l'equazione:
val=(10**-18.76)*(x**5.42)
val= Prezzo BTC in Oro oz t
ecco il grafico su scala logaritmica fino al 2026, come si vede su questa scala tutti i modelli sono praticamente coincidenti.
grafico estrapolato fino al 2036 su scala lineare:
Ecco invece lo stesso grafico su una prospettiva di 70 anni, in scala lineare:
Analisi punti di flesso
Su ogni curva ho indicato con un rettangolino di colore corrispondente il punto di flesso. Da notare che essendo sigmoidi asimmetriche, il punto di flesso e' decentrato rispetto
all'intervallo dell'impulso di crescita.
Nella seguente tabella riporto date e valori nei punti di flesso, e di un intorno dei punti di flesso che va da -182 giorni a +182 giorni ossia un anno.
per calcolare incremento assoluto e percentuale del prezzo in tale intervallo.
osservazioni finali
Dall'osservazione di questi modelli, emergono subito alcune considerazioni:
1) in tutti gli scenari (dallo scenario pessimistico Arulbero alla power law riparametrizzata compresa), si avrebbe un raggiungimento del valore 1 BTC = 50 GOLD Oz t a inizio 2026,
praticamente una certezza.
2) Insistendo sul concetto di "Impulso di crescita", per visualizzare meglio il concetto, ho indicato con dei cerchietti sulle sigmoidi il punto
dove la curva raggiunge il 10% dell'espansione (inizio rampa) e quello dove arriva quasi alla saturazione, ossia al 90% della crescita.
Nel solo scenario pessimistico Arulbero abbiamo gia' passato il punto di inzio rampa a fine 2021, ed abbiamo anche passato il punto di flesso nel 2024.
In pratica questo scenario ci dice che ormai ci rimangono pochi anni per la stabilizzazione finale che avverra' attorno al 2031.
Negli altri tre gli scenari a sigmoide non abbiamo neppure raggiunto il punto di inizio rampa, ossia Bitcoin e'
ancora in uno stato estremamente giovane adozione e quindi di crescita.
Nello scenario "fillippone" l'impulso di crescita raggiungerebbe l'inizio rampa del 10% attorno al 2031, per arrivare alla quasi saturazione del 90% attorno al 2066, ossia un periodo
di 35 anni di impulso di crescita.
Nello scenario "plutosky" l'impulso di crescita raggiungerebbe l'inizio rampa del 10% attorno al 2028, per arrivare alla quasi saturazione del 90% attorno al 2060, ossia un periodo
di piu' di 30 anni di impulso di crescita.
E anche lo scenario "gbianchi" avrebbe un periodo di impulso di crescita che inizierebbe dal 2025 per finire attorno al 2054, ossia poco meno di 30 anni.
Tutte proiezioni ben diverse dai modelli di crescita degli smartphone di poco piu' di 10 anni di impulso di crescita e della stessa internet che e' di poco piu' di 20 anni di impulso di crescita
3) La "power Law" riparametrizzata sull'oro dimostra tutta la sua debolezza nel medio periodo, in quanto supererebbe la situazione di hyperbitcoinization nel 2042,
per continuare inoltre a crescere all'infitinito.
4) uno degli effetti importanti di tale modellazione e' imparare a trattare un prezzo Bitcoin basato sul confronto con l'oro e non con una valuta Fiat.
Lo ritengo un passaggio mentale molto importante, per la miglior comprensione di quali sono i fenomeni endogeni e quelli derivati da cause totalmente esterne, primo su tutti l'inflazione
dell'eventuale Fiat di riferimento.
Riferimenti
[1]Modeling Bitcoin Value with Scarcity
[2]The Bitcoin Power Law Theory
[3]Metcalfe's law
[4]Seeing What’s Next
[5]Logistic function
[6]Reparametrization of asymmetric logistic function
[7]Chart: How Much Gold is in the World?
[8]Hyperbitcoinization
[9]LBMA: The Independent Precious Metals Authority
Ringraziamenti
Ringrazio
Plutosky che mi ha dato lo spunto per riprendere in mano un vecchio progetto che avevo accantonato,
Bitbollo che ha gentilmente letto le prime bozze dell'articolo,
Fillippone che ha suggerito l'inserimento di uno scenario "hyperbitcoinization",
Arulbero che ha suggerito l'inserimento di uno scenario pessimistico e l'evidenziazione grafica e tabellare dei punti di flesso.
Ovviamente ogni errore e' solo mia responsabilita'.
Autore: @gbianchi 1GbianchiJ6EeBU8ua77719Ur7qwLZVk3x
Revisione 0.4 28/10/2024
Prefazione
Nel corso degli anni sono circolati diversi modelli del prezzo di Bitcoin e
recentemente due sono diventati particolarmente noti: il modello S2F di PlanB [1] e il modello PowerLaw di Santostasi [2]
Senza entrare nel merito della logica alla base di questi modelli, emergono immediatamente due ordini di problemi,
che ne invalidano in modo irrimediabile le fondamenta:
1) i modelli sono riferiti ad una valuta Fiat, solitamente prezzo BTC in USD.
2) I modelli tendono a crescere infinitamente nel tempo, quindi si parte gia' con la certezza che saranno prima o poi invalidati.
Cerchero' in questo articolo di derivare un modello che rimuova questi basilari problemi.
Scelta di un corretto valore di riferimento: l'oro
Nell'impostazione di un modello di prezzo del Bitcoin valido nel tempo, dovremo scegliere un valore di riferimento che possiamo
ritenere ragionevolmente costante e stabile. La scelta di una valuta Fiat come valore di riferimento
espone il modello nel tempo alle potenziali variazioni di suddetta valuta. Tali variazioni possono derivare
da problemi inflattivi, problemi politici, problemi economici del paese emittente della valuta Fiat.
Nel caso del Dollaro Usa, nonostante spesso venga considerato valuta di riferimento negli scambi internazionali, tutti
questi problemi si palesano in modo evidente, quindi sia i problemi di svalutazione per inflazione,
problemi di volatilita' per tensioni politiche ed enormi problemi di sostenibilita' del rapporto debito/pil.
In tal modo nel gia' difficile problema di trovare una modello per il prezzo di Bitcoin, introduciamo anche tutta una serie
di altre variabili che sono totalmente estranee alla dinamica intrinseca del modello, ma piuttosto dipendenti da
una serie di situazioni contingenti agli USA.
Per questo motivo, come suggerito da Plutosky, si seguira' il metodo di utilizzare come valore di riferimento il valore di un'oncia troy d'oro,
ossia l'unita' di misura internazionalmente usata per gli scambi in oro.
L'oro si presta bene ad essere usato come campione di riferimento del valore, in quanto e' sovranazionale, quindi il suo valore non dipende
da situazioni locali politiche ed economiche di un singolo paese, non e' sottoposto a particolari pressione inflattive,
ossia la produzione e' nota e e relativamente costante, ed inoltre e' riconosciuto come sistema di valore da millenni in ogni parte del mondo.
La scelta di questo sistema di riferimento, ossia prezzo di BTC/GOLD Oz t toglie immediatamente dall'equazione tutta una serie di variabili
esterne che potrebbero falsare in modo irreparabile ogni tipo di valutazione di lungo periodo.
Un modello matematico sostenibile: la curva logistica
Un altro problema dei precedenti modelli proposti, deriva dal fatto che usano curve "eternamente crescenti", che sono
quindi ontologicamente errate. Nessun sistema fisico puo' crescere all'infinito, in quanto le risorse fisiche sono
per definizione limitate, e quindi ci devono essere degli "upper bound" verso il quale il fenomeno di crescita deve muoversi
in modo asintotico.
Questo e' un discorso generale che ovviamente vale per qualsiasi tipo di risorsa fisica: dal consumo dei carburanti
fossili (che ad un certo punto finiranno) a qualsiasi fenomeno di espansione di popolazioni viventi (che si dovra' fermare quando tutte le risorse
necessarie alla sopravvivenza saranno terminate) e genericamente valido per qualsiasi fenomeno di espansione con utilizzo di risorse fisiche.
Tale genere di problema e' ben studiato e si riassume in una curva sigmoide chiamata logistica.
Risalgono addirittura al 1838 gli studi di Pierre F. Verhulst sulle crescite logistiche, e da allora sono susseguite una serie
di approfondimenti e perfezionamenti nello studio della crescita delle popolazioni.
E' ovvio che nella progressiva adozione di Bitcoin come mezzo di pagamento universalmente accettato, ci troviamo proprio di fronte
ad un problema di questo genere, ossia la crescita della popolazione che sta usando Bitcoin, e che ci sara' un upper bound, ossia un
momento in cui tutti i possibili utenti saranno stati raggiunti, e quindi il sistema non potra' crescere ulteriormente.
Da questo fenomeno, che viene comunemente denominato "adozione di Bitcoin"; dipende poi il suo valore, in quanto maggiore sara' il numero
di persone che useranno Bitcoin come mezzo di pagamento, maggiore sara' il suo valore in seguito alla legge di Metcalfe [3], e anche in considerazione
del fatto che il numero totale di Bitcoin e' limitato a 21.000.000 di unita'.
Quindi possiamo ritenere una dipendenza diretta del valore di Bitcoin dalla popolazione che lo utilizza.
Esempi di altre risorse crescenti secondo curve logistiche
Nel campo economico l'adozione di praticamente ogni prodotto segue una curva logistica: dal momento dell'immissione sul mercato,
fino al raggiungimento dell'upper bound di utenti raggiungibili da tale prodotto.
Ecco due grafici che rappresentano l'adozione di alcuni prodotti e servizi secondo una curva logistica:
ed eccone un altro piu' dettagliato [4] che mette anche in evidenza iil concetto di "impulso di crescita, ossia il periodo di tempo
che passa dal momento di una penetrazione di mercato al 10% fino al momento del 90% di penetrazione di mercato
Individuazione dell'equazione logistica.
L'analisi matematica ci fornisce diverse forme di equazioni logistiche, le piu' semplici sono quelle totalmente simmetriche che sono nella forma
[5]In questo caso vi e' un lower bound che e' 0 un upper bound che e' 1 e un punto di flesso che e' alla coordinata (0,0.5)
Ovviamente per il nostro tipo di analisi ci serve una tipo di logistica piu' malleabile, in quanto si deve adattare
a dei vincoli gia' noti:
1) lower bound = 0
2) deve seguire con buona approssimazione il percorso del prezzo BTC/GOLD Oz t fino ad ora
3) upper bound configurabile.
questo tipo di equazioni esiste e si chiamano "logistiche asimmetriche";
la necessita' di logistica asimmetrica deriva dal fatto che i fenomeni naturali non crescono seguendo
una logistica perfetta, ma ovviamente si adattano all'ambiente e la forma finale della sigmoide risulta un po' deformata.
tra le vare forme di logistiche asimmetriche usero' la seguente per la semplicita' di modellazione sul problema in esame:
[6]In questa logistica si possono impostare 5 parametri, e sono:
LL = Lower Bound
LU = Upper Bound
Ix = X del punto di flesso
S = Slope, pendenza del punto di flesso
c = Fattore di asimmetria.
X = variabile indipendente.
Individuazione Upper Bound.
Individuare un upper bound e' evidentemente il problema piu' difficile.
Esistono diverse stime sull'oro estratto e quello ancora da estrarre. Per evitare di perdere troppo tempo su questo argomento,
usiamo una stima molto approssimativa di 200.000 Tonnellate di oro estratte + 50.000 tonnellate ancora da estrarre. [7]
250.000/31,1035*1000000 sono circa 8.000.000.000 di Oz t di oro totali.
Siccome esistono 21.000.000 di BTC, per avere una parita' di capitalizzazione 1 BTC dovra' valere come 380 Oz t d'oro
Ora fissiamo 4 upper bound, che definiscono i seguenti scenari:
1) Un upper bound "pessimistico" definito Upper bound Arulbero, ove ogni BTC varra' alla fine del processo di adozione 100 Oz t d'oro,
ossia la rete Bitcoin capitalizzera' circa un quarto dell'oro, sostanzialmente un fallimento del progetto Bitcoin, anche se un buon risultato in valore assoluto.
2) Un upper bound "prudenziale" definito Upper bound Gbianchi, ove ogni BTC varra' alla fine del processo di adozione 600 Oz t d'oro,
ossia la rete Bitcoin capitalizzera' il 50% in piu' dell'oro.
3) Un upper Bound "moderatamente ottimistico" definito upper bound Plutosky lo fissiamo a 1100 Oz t d'oro per BTC, ossia la rete Bitcoin capitalizzera' il 200% in piu' dell'oro.
4) Un upper Bound "ottimistico" definito upper bound Fillippone lo fissiamo a 2200 Oz t d'oro per BTC, il doppio del precedente,
un eventuale scenario che si puo' tranquillamente definire di hyperbitcoinization [8]
equazioni finali
Individuati gli upper bound abbiamo tutti gli elementi per risolvere i parametri delle equazioni logistiche finali.
Ricordiamo che gli altri parametri sono un lower bound = 0 e un fitting ottimale con il valore BTC/GOLD Oz t fino ad oggi.
Ricaviamo l'andamento del prezzo BTC/GOLD Oz t come vincolo di fitting ottimale, derivandolo dal
prezzo BTC/USD rapportato al Fxing LBMA GOLD Oz t/USD [9]
quindi otteniamo questi valori per i parametri delle equazioni:
la variabile indipendente x rappresenta in tutti i modelli i giorni trascorsi dal 03/01/2009 (Genesis Block)
Upper bound pessimistico Arulbero
L_L = 0;
L_U = 100;
I_x = 5700;
S = 0.029;
c = -1;
Upper bound prudenziale Gbianchi
L_L = 0;
L_U = 600;
I_x = 8900;
S= 0.068;
c = -20;
Upper bound moderatamente ottimistico Plutosky
L_L = 0;
L_U = 1100;
I_x = 10100;
S = 0.11;
c = -20;
Upper bound ottimistico Fillippone (hyperbitcoinization)
L_L = 0;
L_U = 2200;
I_x = 11400;
S = 0.197;
c = -20;
Inoltre ho anche riparametrizzato la Power Law di Santostasi su BTC Oro Oz t, per avere un confronto
dell'andamento "eternamente crescente" della Power Law con gli andamenti sigmoidi; ecco l'equazione:
val=(10**-18.76)*(x**5.42)
val= Prezzo BTC in Oro oz t
ecco il grafico su scala logaritmica fino al 2026, come si vede su questa scala tutti i modelli sono praticamente coincidenti.
grafico estrapolato fino al 2036 su scala lineare:
Ecco invece lo stesso grafico su una prospettiva di 70 anni, in scala lineare:
Analisi punti di flesso
Su ogni curva ho indicato con un rettangolino di colore corrispondente il punto di flesso. Da notare che essendo sigmoidi asimmetriche, il punto di flesso e' decentrato rispetto
all'intervallo dell'impulso di crescita.
Nella seguente tabella riporto date e valori nei punti di flesso, e di un intorno dei punti di flesso che va da -182 giorni a +182 giorni ossia un anno.
per calcolare incremento assoluto e percentuale del prezzo in tale intervallo.
| Nome dello Scenario | | | Data flesso | | | Valore | | | Data flesso - 182 gg | | | Valore | | | Data flesso + 182 gg | | | Valore | | | Differenza assoluta | | | Differenza % |
| ___________________________________ | | | ______________ | | | ________ | | | ______________ | | | ________ | | | ______________ | | | ________ | | | ______________ | | | ______________ |
| Arulbero Upper Bound 100 BTC/GOLD Oz t | | | 2024-08-12 | | | 42.67 | | | 2024-02-12 | | | 37.41 | | | 2025-02-10 | | | 47.93 | | | 10.51 | | | 28.11 |
| Gbianchi Upper Bound 600 BTC/GOLD Oz t | | | 2033-05-17 | | | 220.72 | | | 2032-11-16 | | | 208.35 | | | 2033-11-15 | | | 233.09 | | | 24.73 | | | 11.87 |
| Plutosky Upper Bound 1100 BTC/GOLD Oz t | | | 2036-08-29 | | | 404.66 | | | 2036-02-29 | | | 384.65 | | | 2037-02-27 | | | 424.67 | | | 40.02 | | | 10.40 |
| Fillippone Upper Bound 2200 BTC/GOLD Oz t | | | 2040-03-21 | | | 809.33 | | | 2039-09-21 | | | 773.49 | | | 2040-09-19 | | | 845.17 | | | 71.68 | | | 9.26 |
osservazioni finali
Dall'osservazione di questi modelli, emergono subito alcune considerazioni:
1) in tutti gli scenari (dallo scenario pessimistico Arulbero alla power law riparametrizzata compresa), si avrebbe un raggiungimento del valore 1 BTC = 50 GOLD Oz t a inizio 2026,
praticamente una certezza.
2) Insistendo sul concetto di "Impulso di crescita", per visualizzare meglio il concetto, ho indicato con dei cerchietti sulle sigmoidi il punto
dove la curva raggiunge il 10% dell'espansione (inizio rampa) e quello dove arriva quasi alla saturazione, ossia al 90% della crescita.
Nel solo scenario pessimistico Arulbero abbiamo gia' passato il punto di inzio rampa a fine 2021, ed abbiamo anche passato il punto di flesso nel 2024.
In pratica questo scenario ci dice che ormai ci rimangono pochi anni per la stabilizzazione finale che avverra' attorno al 2031.
Negli altri tre gli scenari a sigmoide non abbiamo neppure raggiunto il punto di inizio rampa, ossia Bitcoin e'
ancora in uno stato estremamente giovane adozione e quindi di crescita.
Nello scenario "fillippone" l'impulso di crescita raggiungerebbe l'inizio rampa del 10% attorno al 2031, per arrivare alla quasi saturazione del 90% attorno al 2066, ossia un periodo
di 35 anni di impulso di crescita.
Nello scenario "plutosky" l'impulso di crescita raggiungerebbe l'inizio rampa del 10% attorno al 2028, per arrivare alla quasi saturazione del 90% attorno al 2060, ossia un periodo
di piu' di 30 anni di impulso di crescita.
E anche lo scenario "gbianchi" avrebbe un periodo di impulso di crescita che inizierebbe dal 2025 per finire attorno al 2054, ossia poco meno di 30 anni.
Tutte proiezioni ben diverse dai modelli di crescita degli smartphone di poco piu' di 10 anni di impulso di crescita e della stessa internet che e' di poco piu' di 20 anni di impulso di crescita
3) La "power Law" riparametrizzata sull'oro dimostra tutta la sua debolezza nel medio periodo, in quanto supererebbe la situazione di hyperbitcoinization nel 2042,
per continuare inoltre a crescere all'infitinito.
4) uno degli effetti importanti di tale modellazione e' imparare a trattare un prezzo Bitcoin basato sul confronto con l'oro e non con una valuta Fiat.
Lo ritengo un passaggio mentale molto importante, per la miglior comprensione di quali sono i fenomeni endogeni e quelli derivati da cause totalmente esterne, primo su tutti l'inflazione
dell'eventuale Fiat di riferimento.
Riferimenti
[1]Modeling Bitcoin Value with Scarcity
[2]The Bitcoin Power Law Theory
[3]Metcalfe's law
[4]Seeing What’s Next
[5]Logistic function
[6]Reparametrization of asymmetric logistic function
[7]Chart: How Much Gold is in the World?
[8]Hyperbitcoinization
[9]LBMA: The Independent Precious Metals Authority
Ringraziamenti
Ringrazio
Plutosky che mi ha dato lo spunto per riprendere in mano un vecchio progetto che avevo accantonato,
Bitbollo che ha gentilmente letto le prime bozze dell'articolo,
Fillippone che ha suggerito l'inserimento di uno scenario "hyperbitcoinization",
Arulbero che ha suggerito l'inserimento di uno scenario pessimistico e l'evidenziazione grafica e tabellare dei punti di flesso.
Ovviamente ogni errore e' solo mia responsabilita'.
Questo e' Santostasi.
Rispondero' con un articolo completo.
Ma diversi modelli con un saturamento sono gia' proposti.
Ho lavorato a modelli logistici gia' dal 2013.
Uno dei primi modelli era appunto un modello logistico.
Perche' credi che lo ho abbandonato?
Perche' non funziona.
Non solo praticamente stai aggiungendo un livello infinito di modelli.
Non hai nessuna idea dove sara' la saturazione.
Non solo il tuo modello e' piu' complicato della Legge di Potenza e qundi il rasoio di Occam favorisce la power law.
La critica del dollaro e' praticamente ridicola dato che non cambia niente quando si usa l'oro.
Ho gia fatto cento posts e articoli dimostrando che ottiene una power law che e' praticamente parallela con il dollaro.
Il fatto e' semplice, caro amico, ogni assetto che non ha cambiato 8 ordini di magnitudine e' praticamente costante. Non cambia assolutamente niente.
Comunque scivero' come ho detto un articolo completo per rispondere a tutte le critiche.
Ho anche spiegato comunque che la Legge di Potenza non e' per sempre ma abbiamo bisogno solo di due ordini di magnitudine per raggiungere la hyperbitcoinization qundi possiamo andare direttamente via Legge di Potenza senza deviazioni per 2 ordini di magnitudini.
La Legge di Potenza e' bella, semplice, corretta (nessuna evidenza che stiamo saturando) e logicamente consistent. Si focalizza sulle proprieta' di scala che ho provato in modi diversi.
Tutti gli altri modelli non sono originali (come ho detto ho lavorato sul logistic model dal 2013), Steven Perenot anche gia pubblicato su model Weibull usando oro (quindi niente di nuovo o orgininale qui).
Sono contento che stai esplorando l'argomento ma niente di originale.
franky1,
I am not sure about the reporting harassment policies here.
If you continue to do ad hominem, attacking my professional background, my integrity, or other personal attacks I will report you. it is obvious to anybody that you are a troll and have zero understanding or knowledge about these subjects. It is not even worth answering you or addressing any of the things you are saying besides telling you that I would not tolerate personal attacks so if this forum allows me to report this behavior I will.
You even follow me from post to post just to harass me. If you want to have a scientific discussion or you want to ask questions I will answer them but again stop the personal attacks. This is the last time I ask nicely. Thank you.
I am not sure about the reporting harassment policies here.
If you continue to do ad hominem, attacking my professional background, my integrity, or other personal attacks I will report you. it is obvious to anybody that you are a troll and have zero understanding or knowledge about these subjects. It is not even worth answering you or addressing any of the things you are saying besides telling you that I would not tolerate personal attacks so if this forum allows me to report this behavior I will.
You even follow me from post to post just to harass me. If you want to have a scientific discussion or you want to ask questions I will answer them but again stop the personal attacks. This is the last time I ask nicely. Thank you.
This is Giovanni.
It is astounding to me that people do not realize what this is all about.
It is a full theory of how Bitcoin is, how it works, and how it behaves. The predictability of the price is really one of the least interesting things besides the fact that being scale invariant it is predictable.
The Theory is consistent in almost all kinds of questions you want to ask about Bitcoin. For example, answering your question. No, it will not be banned because Bitcoin survived as a scale-invariant system for 15 years.
It is anti-fragile, it is flexible and resilient. All the qualities that people use words to describe Bitcoin are actually proven mathematically (besides being scarce) in this Theory.
And it is a Theory, not a model. A full Theory, the only one I know in existence, of what Bitcoin is.
The Theory tells Bitcoin is not an asset, it is more like a living organism, a living being, a city, a mountain.
An important missing part of the previous post is to show the universality of power laws, how they can describe natural phenomena, social phenomena, and how cities grow.
Every single Bitcoiner should know the Theory and they should try to understand it. If it is true, and so far all the evidence points to be true, then it is the most important discovery about Bitcoin ever.
Saylor can use analogies or metaphors about Bitcoin, the Theory uses science to show what Bitcoin is really about.
It is amazing and weird to me that is it not viral or well known and discussed by everybody, not because I created it, but because it tells an incredibly beautiful narrative about Bitcoin and it is not a bunch of made-up words, but it is based on scientific evidence, logic, math, and physical arguments.
I know it is early and most people do not have a scientific background but it is still amazing that the significance of this discovery is not yet understood by most.
Hopefully, it will happen soon or later.
It is astounding to me that people do not realize what this is all about.
It is a full theory of how Bitcoin is, how it works, and how it behaves. The predictability of the price is really one of the least interesting things besides the fact that being scale invariant it is predictable.
The Theory is consistent in almost all kinds of questions you want to ask about Bitcoin. For example, answering your question. No, it will not be banned because Bitcoin survived as a scale-invariant system for 15 years.
It is anti-fragile, it is flexible and resilient. All the qualities that people use words to describe Bitcoin are actually proven mathematically (besides being scarce) in this Theory.
And it is a Theory, not a model. A full Theory, the only one I know in existence, of what Bitcoin is.
The Theory tells Bitcoin is not an asset, it is more like a living organism, a living being, a city, a mountain.
An important missing part of the previous post is to show the universality of power laws, how they can describe natural phenomena, social phenomena, and how cities grow.
Every single Bitcoiner should know the Theory and they should try to understand it. If it is true, and so far all the evidence points to be true, then it is the most important discovery about Bitcoin ever.
Saylor can use analogies or metaphors about Bitcoin, the Theory uses science to show what Bitcoin is really about.
It is amazing and weird to me that is it not viral or well known and discussed by everybody, not because I created it, but because it tells an incredibly beautiful narrative about Bitcoin and it is not a bunch of made-up words, but it is based on scientific evidence, logic, math, and physical arguments.
I know it is early and most people do not have a scientific background but it is still amazing that the significance of this discovery is not yet understood by most.
Hopefully, it will happen soon or later.
Can't say I'm overly keen on the name. If it's a power law, just stick with power law. The word "scaling" is far more closely associated with network usage, not price. I feel it just creates unnecessary confusion.
Aside from that, you have my support. Ignore renowned troll franky1. No one takes him seriously and the forum is a much nicer place with him added to your ignore list.
Yeah, I understand what you say, I didn't think about that, people may confuse "scaling" with network usage even if in this case I meant the scale of price (10,100,1000) and scaling of time. But I can see how this can lead to confusion. Scaling is a term we use in physics, and I was trying to emphasize that physics terminology. There is a good by G. West called Scale that is all about this topic but I understand what you are saying. Aside from that, you have my support. Ignore renowned troll franky1. No one takes him seriously and the forum is a much nicer place with him added to your ignore list.
Yeah, franky1 is a troll, very annoying.
Please take a look at this model.
It has 3 components:
1) Power Law in time 2) sinusoidal oscillations with period 4 years (the first bubble is not modeled because probably due to MtGox and it is not associated with halvings) 3) exponential decay of the peaks over time.
The model does a very good job of following closely the bottoms (almost perfectly) and it can model most of the behavior of the price during the bubbles. The next bubble top should be close to $200K but it depends if we see a continuation of the decay we observed in previous cycles.
I extrapolated the model up to 2033 when the prediction is that BTC will reach 1 M.
https://twitter.com/Giovann35084111/status/1746235708959060220/photo/1
It has 3 components:
1) Power Law in time 2) sinusoidal oscillations with period 4 years (the first bubble is not modeled because probably due to MtGox and it is not associated with halvings) 3) exponential decay of the peaks over time.
The model does a very good job of following closely the bottoms (almost perfectly) and it can model most of the behavior of the price during the bubbles. The next bubble top should be close to $200K but it depends if we see a continuation of the decay we observed in previous cycles.
I extrapolated the model up to 2033 when the prediction is that BTC will reach 1 M.
https://twitter.com/Giovann35084111/status/1746235708959060220/photo/1
This graph addresses the comments of the skeptics that sais the model will change the parameters over time and so it is not valid. The parameters change slightly as we add more data mostly because of the large deviations during the bubbles. It depends if you do the fitting near the top or bottom. This has nothin to do with the goodness of the model but the fact we have a phenomenon with a general trend and period large deviations.
Anyway, I calculated the slope and y-intercept of the power law for each day in the last 7 years and created a model for each day using these parameters extrapolated to today and all the data for the real up today (so it is easy to compare all the models). I then averaged the model given the parameters oscillate around a mean value. I compare with the model today. This is the result:
https://twitter.com/Giovann35084111/status/1746312103089328281
As you can see the model today and the average over parameters up to 7 years ago is basically identical for all purposes. This shows the power law pattern is stable in time. This should resolve all doubts.
Of course, it doesn't guarantee that is going to work forever but even if does we will learn something about the dynamic of BTC. So far the power law has been respected and I will expect to work in the same for several years in the future.
Anyway, I calculated the slope and y-intercept of the power law for each day in the last 7 years and created a model for each day using these parameters extrapolated to today and all the data for the real up today (so it is easy to compare all the models). I then averaged the model given the parameters oscillate around a mean value. I compare with the model today. This is the result:
https://twitter.com/Giovann35084111/status/1746312103089328281
As you can see the model today and the average over parameters up to 7 years ago is basically identical for all purposes. This shows the power law pattern is stable in time. This should resolve all doubts.
Of course, it doesn't guarantee that is going to work forever but even if does we will learn something about the dynamic of BTC. So far the power law has been respected and I will expect to work in the same for several years in the future.
Re: [Strategy of Dr.Bitcoin_Strange] BITCOIN'S SELL TO BUY MORE STRATEGY
I think in the last cycle price dipped to 16.6k lower than 19.5k (prev cycle's high) But the one before (2016-2020) yes the correction is higher than the prev. all time high. I guess you can never really assign a pattern to these things.
patterns only work until everyone sees the pattern then people bet against or plan early to beat the pattern, thus breaking the pattern
there are many reasons why the 20k-16.5k are outliers because based on a hourly chart numbers show spikes to those. but on daily/weekly they do not which show difference between a few odd people getting extremely luck vs the real value-premium opportunities that many could get
(in short not everyone got the opportunity to sell at max high of 2017 and max low of 2022)
however
expecting a $50k(lucky few if any) after 2025 ATH is stretching things a bit too far below previous ATH of $70k
a SAFE bet would be to treat $70k(opportunity for masses) as bottom rather then waiting and hoping to see $50k, because it might not get to $50k
remember the social and speculation of most:
being online, available, cash despostited and ready to press button and able to precicely decide "now is the time" and pick the exact bottom of $50k instead of wishful thinking "what if it went to $48k ill wait a bit longer.. "and then mis out completely
This actually makes sense. Yes, 50 % from the top is good bet without any other tools to estimate tops and bottom. I think $140,000 is conservative for the top.
bitcoin is a curve on a LOG model
YOUR chart is not log .. you manipulated the log multiplier and even you cant use a constant. which shows bitcoin doesnt stay on a straight line because you need to alter the log number periodically
so it doesnt fit a model
its like you want to pretend clothes fit a particular mannequin model. but then endlessly rebuilding the mannequin model to try to ensure the clothes fit
im telling you and alerting others that you mess with the mannequin model, thus no way of knowing the true clothes size comparison/expectation
analogy
imagine you had weighing scales in your house and you want to tell your wife you can lose 8% weight by next year
you would happily turn the dial/adjust sprints/counter balance, under the scales to make 1kg=0.92kg
and then show her that the read-out says you are 8% lighter.. shouting "but the scales prove my weight" and getting angry if she even suggests you tweaked the measurements and not had constants to compare physics to your body weight
YOUR chart is not log .. you manipulated the log multiplier and even you cant use a constant. which shows bitcoin doesnt stay on a straight line because you need to alter the log number periodically
so it doesnt fit a model
its like you want to pretend clothes fit a particular mannequin model. but then endlessly rebuilding the mannequin model to try to ensure the clothes fit
im telling you and alerting others that you mess with the mannequin model, thus no way of knowing the true clothes size comparison/expectation
analogy
imagine you had weighing scales in your house and you want to tell your wife you can lose 8% weight by next year
you would happily turn the dial/adjust sprints/counter balance, under the scales to make 1kg=0.92kg
and then show her that the read-out says you are 8% lighter.. shouting "but the scales prove my weight" and getting angry if she even suggests you tweaked the measurements and not had constants to compare physics to your body weight
How many times I need to repeat myself? YES, BTC IS A CURVE ON A LOG-LINEAR CHART !!!! I know because that is exactly what a power law looks on a log-linear chart, that curve is EXACTLY a power law.
Here is you can see the same graph here, it curves, same equation, same model, different chart type. Learn something.
https://twitter.com/Giovann35084111/status/1746243124278804748/photo/1
When you plot the same graph on a log-log chart then it becomes a straight line. That is what power laws do.
https://twitter.com/Giovann35084111/status/1746082576337625380/photo/1
Do you get it now?
The graph I posted here is another type of graph where I calculated the price given by the model above and plotted on the x-axis and the real price on the y-axis. I know this is too difficult for you to comprehend but stop to say idiocies.
It is just 3 ways of showing the same thing.
There is nothing tweaked, there is nothing changed. These are models. If you don't understand it is your problem.
Also, stop harassing me, I'm serious now. Your comments are just trolling at this point and I initiated this thread. Just go and discuss with somebody else. I will look at the rules on the site and report you if necessary.
bitcoin is a curve on a LOG model
YOUR chart is not log .. you manipulated the log multiplier and even you cant use a constant. which shows bitcoin doesnt stay on a straight line because you need to alter the log number periodically
so it doesnt fit a model
its like you want to pretend clothes fit a particular mannequin model. but then endlessly rebuilding the mannequin model to try to ensure the clothes fit
im telling you and alerting others that you mess with the mannequin model, thus no way of knowing the true clothes size comparison/expectation
analogy
imagine you had weighing scales in your house and you want to tell your wife you can lose 8% weight by next year
you would happily turn the dial/adjust sprints/counter balance, under the scales to make 1kg=0.92kg
and then show her that the read-out says you are 8% lighter.. shouting "but the scales prove my weight" and getting angry if she even suggests you tweaked the measurements and not had constants to compare physics to your body weight
YOUR chart is not log .. you manipulated the log multiplier and even you cant use a constant. which shows bitcoin doesnt stay on a straight line because you need to alter the log number periodically
so it doesnt fit a model
its like you want to pretend clothes fit a particular mannequin model. but then endlessly rebuilding the mannequin model to try to ensure the clothes fit
im telling you and alerting others that you mess with the mannequin model, thus no way of knowing the true clothes size comparison/expectation
analogy
imagine you had weighing scales in your house and you want to tell your wife you can lose 8% weight by next year
you would happily turn the dial/adjust sprints/counter balance, under the scales to make 1kg=0.92kg
and then show her that the read-out says you are 8% lighter.. shouting "but the scales prove my weight" and getting angry if she even suggests you tweaked the measurements and not had constants to compare physics to your body weight
How many times I need to repeat myself? YES, BTC IS A CURVE ON A LOG-LINEAR CHART !!!! I know because that is exactly what a power law looks on a log-linear chart, that curve is EXACTLY a power law.
Here is you can see the same graph here, it curves, same equation, same model, different chart type. Learn something.
https://twitter.com/Giovann35084111/status/1746243124278804748/photo/1
When you plot the same graph on a log-log chart then it becomes a straight line. That is what power laws do.
https://twitter.com/Giovann35084111/status/1746082576337625380/photo/1
Do you get it now?
The graph I posted here is another type of graph where I calculated the price given by the model above and plotted on the x-axis and the real price on the y-axis. I know this is too difficult for you to comprehend but stop to say idiocies.
It is just 3 ways of showing the same thing.
There is nothing tweaked, there is nothing changed. These are models. If you don't understand it is your problem.
Have you ever analyzed data in your life?
Very such a thing called randomness and noise.
Try to measure the temperature in a room. Of course is going to change over time. What you do is measure over and over and then take an average. You can then plot a distribution of the noise level to see which kind of randomness you are dealing with, you can calculate standard deviations, and so on. Every measurement has noise. You want to teach me, what I taught in college how to do measurements, how to do an experiment and calibrate things, lol. Your example is stupid. You have no idea of what noise is, how to estimate errors, statistical methods and so on. In fact, you have no idea what a short is and you still wanted to debate that. You have Legendary status but you are simply a troll.
bitcoin is a curve on a LOG model
YOUR chart is not log .. you manipulated the log multiplier and even you cant use a constant. which shows bitcoin doesnt stay on a straight line because you need to alter the log number periodically
so it doesnt fit a model
its like you want to pretend clothes fit a particular mannequin model. but then endlessly rebuilding the mannequin model to try to ensure the clothes fit
im telling you and alerting others that you mess with the mannequin model, thus no way of knowing the true clothes size comparison/expectation
analogy
imagine you had weighing scales in your house and you want to tell your wife you can lose 8% weight by next year
you would happily turn the dial/adjust sprints/counter balance, under the scales to make 1kg=0.92kg
and then show her that the read-out says you are 8% lighter.. shouting "but the scales prove my weight" and getting angry if she even suggests you tweaked the measurements and not had constants to compare physics to your body weight
YOUR chart is not log .. you manipulated the log multiplier and even you cant use a constant. which shows bitcoin doesnt stay on a straight line because you need to alter the log number periodically
so it doesnt fit a model
its like you want to pretend clothes fit a particular mannequin model. but then endlessly rebuilding the mannequin model to try to ensure the clothes fit
im telling you and alerting others that you mess with the mannequin model, thus no way of knowing the true clothes size comparison/expectation
analogy
imagine you had weighing scales in your house and you want to tell your wife you can lose 8% weight by next year
you would happily turn the dial/adjust sprints/counter balance, under the scales to make 1kg=0.92kg
and then show her that the read-out says you are 8% lighter.. shouting "but the scales prove my weight" and getting angry if she even suggests you tweaked the measurements and not had constants to compare physics to your body weight
How many times I need to repeat myself? YES, BTC IS A CURVE ON A LOG-LINEAR CHART !!!! I know because that is exactly what a power law looks on a log-linear chart, that curve is EXACTLY a power law.
Here is you can see the same graph here, it curves, same equation, same model, different chart type. Learn something.
https://twitter.com/Giovann35084111/status/1746243124278804748/photo/1
When you plot the same graph on a log-log chart then it becomes a straight line. That is what power laws do.
https://twitter.com/Giovann35084111/status/1746082576337625380/photo/1
Do you get it now?
The graph I posted here is another type of graph where I calculated the price given by the model above and plotted on the x-axis and the real price on the y-axis. I know this is too difficult for you to comprehend but stop to say idiocies.
It is just 3 ways of showing the same thing.
There is nothing tweaked, there is nothing changed. These are models. If you don't understand it is your problem.
Re: [Strategy of Dr.Bitcoin_Strange] BITCOIN'S SELL TO BUY MORE STRATEGY
If you buy one bitcoin at $16k and sell it at $100k, then the price drops to $50k and you re-buy it again, spending $100k, that amount will buy you an extra one bitcoin, making it possible for you to own two bitcoins rather than the one you were holding. That's what I call "sell to buy more strategy. "
by the way
every market cycle has shown that cycle #2's low doesnt go below cycle #1's high
so if you are expecting 2025 ATH to go to 100k.. you will be let down if you then wait for the correction back to $50k.. because it wont go back down that low
actual real world math of the real economy of bitcoin acquisition costs has a speculative window of possibility of $25k-$140k this year
if you had said sell at $140k 2025 ATH.. and bought at $70k post 2025 ATH high's correction(new bottom). you might have a chance to maximise your short
The price went down almost 75 % from the top to the bottom the last cycle and in the previous one, it went down 87 %.
your model breaks. becomes less accurate and doesnt use a constant..
your proving nothing
anyone can take any data and at one time manipulate it into appearing to conform to a straight line with a range of boundaries/buffer/outliers.
but if at a later date a peer takes your exact numbers and does it themselves and doesnt get the same results.. the theory is debunked
you endless showcasing that you have been working endlessly on it for 15 years shows its broke because you need to keep fixing it periodically
however the blue (your supposed mid line) does not even follow the mid point of the market cycle
the green line doesnt even follow the bottom of the market
in short it has nothing to do with the market
you simply straightened a curve into a diagonal chart. and just drew a line for the axis not for the market data.
you then notice you cant get lines to fit the market data so then call it "undervalued" and "over priced" when the market data doesnt fit your silly theory
..
here is a thing though
you can look at the average hashrate of network over a period. look at current gen asics hashrate electric and hardware. and calculate the bitcoin price min and max dependant on dominant global countries electric price. and get a min/max mining cost.. and you will see the market has traded within that range
so not out of bounds of real economics
yep
2021 5k-75k was its global mining cost efficient/inefficient window and the market stayed inbounds
2022 10k-95k was its global mining cost efficient/inefficient window and the market stayed inbounds
2023 15k-110k was its global mining cost efficient/inefficient window and the market stayed inbounds
there are logical, social and economic reasons why the market stays inbounds of global min max mining
if no one on planet can mine for less no one wants to sell for less and everyone sees it cheaper to buy than mine so everyone is buying no one is selling causing a support line no one wants to cross
if everyone on planet can mine for less no one wants to buy for more and everyone sees it cheaper to mine to sell rather than buy, so everyone is mining/selling, no one is buying causing a resistance top line no one wants to cross
so when you then see the market hit those limits but not cross them you see the market is performing as expected when testing the boundaries
your proving nothing
anyone can take any data and at one time manipulate it into appearing to conform to a straight line with a range of boundaries/buffer/outliers.
but if at a later date a peer takes your exact numbers and does it themselves and doesnt get the same results.. the theory is debunked
you endless showcasing that you have been working endlessly on it for 15 years shows its broke because you need to keep fixing it periodically
The top line is not supposed to match the highs of the market. It is evident they don't follow a trend. The decay can also be modelled but it is not what the lines are trying to do. They are trying to do the second best thing that is to identify places where the price is too high and it is a good idea to disinvest.
the top line doesnt, thanks for admitting ithowever the blue (your supposed mid line) does not even follow the mid point of the market cycle
the green line doesnt even follow the bottom of the market
in short it has nothing to do with the market
you simply straightened a curve into a diagonal chart. and just drew a line for the axis not for the market data.
you then notice you cant get lines to fit the market data so then call it "undervalued" and "over priced" when the market data doesnt fit your silly theory
..
here is a thing though
you can look at the average hashrate of network over a period. look at current gen asics hashrate electric and hardware. and calculate the bitcoin price min and max dependant on dominant global countries electric price. and get a min/max mining cost.. and you will see the market has traded within that range
so not out of bounds of real economics
yep
2021 5k-75k was its global mining cost efficient/inefficient window and the market stayed inbounds
2022 10k-95k was its global mining cost efficient/inefficient window and the market stayed inbounds
2023 15k-110k was its global mining cost efficient/inefficient window and the market stayed inbounds
there are logical, social and economic reasons why the market stays inbounds of global min max mining
if no one on planet can mine for less no one wants to sell for less and everyone sees it cheaper to buy than mine so everyone is buying no one is selling causing a support line no one wants to cross
if everyone on planet can mine for less no one wants to buy for more and everyone sees it cheaper to mine to sell rather than buy, so everyone is mining/selling, no one is buying causing a resistance top line no one wants to cross
so when you then see the market hit those limits but not cross them you see the market is performing as expected when testing the boundaries
Your estimates are not very useful because they are so wide and also they don't tell us where the bottom is or the top, not even close.
Also, do not reveal anything about the behavior of BTC in terms of deep network and fractal properties. If you are not interesting in this discussion simply go back to explain to people (wrongly) what shorting is all about.
your model breaks. becomes less accurate and doesnt use a constant..
your proving nothing
anyone can take any data and at one time manipulate it into appearing to conform to a straight line with a range of boundaries/buffer/outliers.
but if at a later date a peer takes your exact numbers and does it themselves and doesnt get the same results.. the theory is debunked
you endless showcasing that you have been working endlessly on it for 15 years shows its broke because you need to keep fixing it periodically
however the blue (your supposed mid line) does not even follow the mid point of the market cycle
the green line doesnt even follow the bottom of the market
in short it has nothing to do with the market
you simply straightened a curve into a diagonal chart. and just drew a line for the axis not for the market data.
you then notice you cant get lines to fit the market data so then call it "undervalued" and "over priced" when the market data doesnt fit your silly theory
..
here is a thing though
you can look at the average hashrate of network over a period. look at current gen asics hashrate electric and hardware. and calculate the bitcoin price min and max dependant on dominant global countries electric price. and get a min/max mining cost.. and you will see the market has traded within that range
so not out of bounds of real economics
yep
2021 5k-75k was its global mining cost efficient/inefficient window and the market stayed inbounds
2022 10k-95k was its global mining cost efficient/inefficient window and the market stayed inbounds
2023 15k-110k was its global mining cost efficient/inefficient window and the market stayed inbounds
currently 2024 is 25k-140k
so dont expect price to crash below $25k unless hashrate takes a huge knockdown and markets negatively react
so dont expect price to hype above $140k unless hashrate suddenly increases and markets hyper react
your proving nothing
anyone can take any data and at one time manipulate it into appearing to conform to a straight line with a range of boundaries/buffer/outliers.
but if at a later date a peer takes your exact numbers and does it themselves and doesnt get the same results.. the theory is debunked
you endless showcasing that you have been working endlessly on it for 15 years shows its broke because you need to keep fixing it periodically
The top line is not supposed to match the highs of the market. It is evident they don't follow a trend. The decay can also be modelled but it is not what the lines are trying to do. They are trying to do the second best thing that is to identify places where the price is too high and it is a good idea to disinvest.
the top line doesnt, thanks for admitting ithowever the blue (your supposed mid line) does not even follow the mid point of the market cycle
the green line doesnt even follow the bottom of the market
in short it has nothing to do with the market
you simply straightened a curve into a diagonal chart. and just drew a line for the axis not for the market data.
you then notice you cant get lines to fit the market data so then call it "undervalued" and "over priced" when the market data doesnt fit your silly theory
..
here is a thing though
you can look at the average hashrate of network over a period. look at current gen asics hashrate electric and hardware. and calculate the bitcoin price min and max dependant on dominant global countries electric price. and get a min/max mining cost.. and you will see the market has traded within that range
so not out of bounds of real economics
yep
2021 5k-75k was its global mining cost efficient/inefficient window and the market stayed inbounds
2022 10k-95k was its global mining cost efficient/inefficient window and the market stayed inbounds
2023 15k-110k was its global mining cost efficient/inefficient window and the market stayed inbounds
currently 2024 is 25k-140k
so dont expect price to crash below $25k unless hashrate takes a huge knockdown and markets negatively react
so dont expect price to hype above $140k unless hashrate suddenly increases and markets hyper react
You are simply ignorant. Hard-headed and ignorant.
In fact, I checked your other posts and it is obvious you are ignorant.
You don't even know what shorting is and you want to come here and discuss mathematical modelling.
No, the trend doesn't have to go through the middle of what your eyes says is the middle. In the graph in this thread the middle line is y=x simply. It is the line when the two prices the real and the estimated price meet. Because the black line oscillates around this middle line it shows the model price is on average (the key is average) reproducing the real price. In 5 years from now, the graph will look almost identical, I tried to explain this to you and the only reason I still address it is because some other person will read this and need to know you say just idiocies after idiocies.
As data comes in one updates the model. Of course, if they change radically they are invalid but this model is simply becoming more stable and better.
I don't dictate what the price is doing. It is very obvious to anybody with a minimal amount of math knowledge that the bottom line is determining almost perfectly the bottom prices. You just show how idiotic your comments are by insisting it doesn't. The tops as discussed do not align and there is useful information that seem to indicate they decrease with each cycle. I explained already how we deal with this information (but it went above your head).
No, not everybody can make data go in straight line. I didn't make the data go in straight line, BTC is a straight line one a log-log chart (and this is in a sense a log-log chart given the black dots is the transformation of the data given the power law formula.
You know I talked with many people and you are one of the few people (there was another one a few years ago, not sure if it is you because you two have the same level of ignorance) who is insisting on something while showing a complete lack of understanding about basic concepts and ideas. Not sure if there is an option to block you, I'm looking for that in this antequate app but you are really being disruptive and contribute nothing to the discussion. Maybe I should just ignore you.
Re: [Strategy of Dr.Bitcoin_Strange] BITCOIN'S SELL TO BUY MORE STRATEGY
Abstract
How about considering the "sell to buy more strategy?"
This is just a common strategy where you have to sell your bitcoin bit by bit during the peak of every bull market. From history, the peak bull market usually takes place the year after Bitcoin halved. So, what is implied by this strategy is to sell your formal hold during the bull market, then buy back during the bear market. The bear market will surely come after the bull market. Read further, and you will see the risk attached, the reason for the strategy, and how to go about it.
This strategy could be what another Bitcoiner might have practiced or is actually planning to do too, but I have been on this forum for a year and three months now, and I have not actually come across people talking relatively to this type of Bitcoin investment idea more often, probably because they think it's not worth it or because it's just nothing special.
If not many, I have seen at least two old members of this forum whose comments stated that they have been holding their bitcoin for more than 8–10 years now and have not sold any bitcoin from their holding. while, the price of bitcoin has been going up during every bull market and falling again during the bear market.
There is this phrase, buy the dip and hold, which refers to buying Bitcoin at a low price or at a price you (the investor) consider to be the bottom or cheap. After buying the dip, you must also be willing to hold the investment until a bull market occurs. (Buying the dip and holding it for a long time until it generates a huge profit is a profitable means of investing in Bitcoin.)
It's normal to invest in Bitcoin and hold it for as many years as you want, and while holding, you can still invest more using the DCA method, but the strategy I want to discuss is also simple and will be profitable if properly managed.
Bitcoin is known to have two seasons, which are the bear and bull seasons. The bull season usually starts in the year of the bitcoin halving or the year after the halving. Looking at the price history of Bitcoin, the price usually experiences a sharp fall in price after the bull market is over, and if perhaps you sold your Bitcoin during the bull market, you can hold your money (fiat) and wait for the bear market, which gives rise to a sharp fall in the Bitcoin price. Then you can buy more bitcoin, which is more than the number or fraction that you sold in the bull market.
A Little Recap of The 3 Circles of Bitcoin Halving
The first Bitcoin halving happened in 2012; from price history, through out that year, Bitcoin traded just around the price range of $4.7–$16, but in 2013, the bull market kicked in and Bitcoin spiked above $1000 for the first time. The bear market started in 2014, as the price dropped to $320.19 at the close of the year.
The second halving took place in 2016, as the starting price for that year was $400+, but in 2017, the price spiked again, and for the first time, Bitcoin got to $19k+ around December of that year. In 2018, in the month of December, bitcoin dropped to about $3,100 (a bear market too).
Third halving of Bitcoin is what many people already knew about. After the halving took place in 2020, during 2021 the bull market started and Bitcoin got to $68k, but we all know the story after then till now.
Why do I think it's wise and can be profitable to apply Bitcoin's sell-to-buy-more strategy?
Possible risk involved in this strategy.
How to go about this strategy:
Step 1= First, if you invest in Bitcoin, read about the price speculation of other people and price discussions on the forum, and also make your own assumptions about the price that you are expecting during the bull market.
Step 2= Set out 2–3 target prices for which you will like to sell your bitcoin, and when the bull market starts, sell in different fractions as you earlier set your target price(Note: don't sell all your bitcoin at once). After you have sold, patiently hold on to your fiat. While doing so, also be active in discussions relating to price, then make your prediction and also set a price target that you would love to buy. Note: don't buy with all your fiat at once, DCA should be applied. Reason why you must not invest all fait at once is because price might still dip more.
If you sell high at the bull market and buy low at the bear market, you stand the chance to have increased your holding.
For example, if you bought 1 bitcoin for $16k in the month of January 2023 and you are still holding it now, you are already on profit. Keep holding. Perhaps you hold until the peak bull market starts this year or towards the end of next year, and maybe the price of bitcoin gets to $80k, $90k, and $100k+, respectively, and progressively. After selling your Bitcoin at those said price, your total asset becomes $100k or more, and you hold that money till 2026 when the bear market will start again (and perhaps the price drops to $60k, $50k, and $40k, respectively,) you will be able to buy more that the 1 Bitcoin you bought.
If you buy one bitcoin at $16k and sell it at $100k, then the price drops to $50k and you re-buy it again, spending $100k, that amount will buy you an extra one bitcoin, making it possible for you to own two bitcoins rather than the one you were holding. That's what I call "sell to buy more strategy. "
How about considering the "sell to buy more strategy?"
This is just a common strategy where you have to sell your bitcoin bit by bit during the peak of every bull market. From history, the peak bull market usually takes place the year after Bitcoin halved. So, what is implied by this strategy is to sell your formal hold during the bull market, then buy back during the bear market. The bear market will surely come after the bull market. Read further, and you will see the risk attached, the reason for the strategy, and how to go about it.
This strategy could be what another Bitcoiner might have practiced or is actually planning to do too, but I have been on this forum for a year and three months now, and I have not actually come across people talking relatively to this type of Bitcoin investment idea more often, probably because they think it's not worth it or because it's just nothing special.
If not many, I have seen at least two old members of this forum whose comments stated that they have been holding their bitcoin for more than 8–10 years now and have not sold any bitcoin from their holding. while, the price of bitcoin has been going up during every bull market and falling again during the bear market.
There is this phrase, buy the dip and hold, which refers to buying Bitcoin at a low price or at a price you (the investor) consider to be the bottom or cheap. After buying the dip, you must also be willing to hold the investment until a bull market occurs. (Buying the dip and holding it for a long time until it generates a huge profit is a profitable means of investing in Bitcoin.)
It's normal to invest in Bitcoin and hold it for as many years as you want, and while holding, you can still invest more using the DCA method, but the strategy I want to discuss is also simple and will be profitable if properly managed.
Bitcoin is known to have two seasons, which are the bear and bull seasons. The bull season usually starts in the year of the bitcoin halving or the year after the halving. Looking at the price history of Bitcoin, the price usually experiences a sharp fall in price after the bull market is over, and if perhaps you sold your Bitcoin during the bull market, you can hold your money (fiat) and wait for the bear market, which gives rise to a sharp fall in the Bitcoin price. Then you can buy more bitcoin, which is more than the number or fraction that you sold in the bull market.
A Little Recap of The 3 Circles of Bitcoin Halving
The first Bitcoin halving happened in 2012; from price history, through out that year, Bitcoin traded just around the price range of $4.7–$16, but in 2013, the bull market kicked in and Bitcoin spiked above $1000 for the first time. The bear market started in 2014, as the price dropped to $320.19 at the close of the year.
The second halving took place in 2016, as the starting price for that year was $400+, but in 2017, the price spiked again, and for the first time, Bitcoin got to $19k+ around December of that year. In 2018, in the month of December, bitcoin dropped to about $3,100 (a bear market too).
Third halving of Bitcoin is what many people already knew about. After the halving took place in 2020, during 2021 the bull market started and Bitcoin got to $68k, but we all know the story after then till now.
Why do I think it's wise and can be profitable to apply Bitcoin's sell-to-buy-more strategy?
- Because Bitcoin will definitely experience a bear market after every bull market.
- Because if you manage the strategy well, you will increase your holding.
- Because Bitcoin is a volatile asset, the price must definitely swing up and down.
- Because the three experienced Bitcoin halving has proven that the bear and bull markets are always certain.
Possible risk involved in this strategy.
- Bitcoin is a volatile asset, and its predicted price is not usually very accurate.
- You will not accurately know what the ATH (peak) will be during the bull market.
- You will not know what the bottom price will be during a bear market.
- While holding a fiat and waiting for a bear market, the fiat could devalue. Secondly, fiat is a centralized currency; just hope nothing gets complicated on the smart contract while holding a huge sum of it in your wallet.
How to go about this strategy:
Step 1= First, if you invest in Bitcoin, read about the price speculation of other people and price discussions on the forum, and also make your own assumptions about the price that you are expecting during the bull market.
Step 2= Set out 2–3 target prices for which you will like to sell your bitcoin, and when the bull market starts, sell in different fractions as you earlier set your target price(Note: don't sell all your bitcoin at once). After you have sold, patiently hold on to your fiat. While doing so, also be active in discussions relating to price, then make your prediction and also set a price target that you would love to buy. Note: don't buy with all your fiat at once, DCA should be applied. Reason why you must not invest all fait at once is because price might still dip more.
If you sell high at the bull market and buy low at the bear market, you stand the chance to have increased your holding.
For example, if you bought 1 bitcoin for $16k in the month of January 2023 and you are still holding it now, you are already on profit. Keep holding. Perhaps you hold until the peak bull market starts this year or towards the end of next year, and maybe the price of bitcoin gets to $80k, $90k, and $100k+, respectively, and progressively. After selling your Bitcoin at those said price, your total asset becomes $100k or more, and you hold that money till 2026 when the bear market will start again (and perhaps the price drops to $60k, $50k, and $40k, respectively,) you will be able to buy more that the 1 Bitcoin you bought.
If you buy one bitcoin at $16k and sell it at $100k, then the price drops to $50k and you re-buy it again, spending $100k, that amount will buy you an extra one bitcoin, making it possible for you to own two bitcoins rather than the one you were holding. That's what I call "sell to buy more strategy. "
There are models of the price of BTC that allows to determine areas when the price of BTC is overvalued and when the price is oversold. I have worked on a model for several years and I have used it to find the bottoms almost perfectly and to come close to the tops. Tops are more difficult to determine but we can still identify areas where it is to sell even if not quite at the top.
Here is the model that I'm discussing:
https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/18z04kp/15_years_of_btc_power_law/
I programmed this method in Tradingview by telling the algo to buy when the price is 50 % the trendline and sell when the price is 200 % of the trendline. I did backtesting over the last 10 years and the success rate is basically 100 % and one can literally multiply the BTC themselves by 100x of time even without leverage. With time the distance from the bottom to the top is becoming smaller but there are still chances to make at least 5x if one times correctly these moves. The model I have shown helps with timing more precisely the entry and exits.
Re: [Strategy of Dr.Bitcoin_Strange] BITCOIN'S SELL TO BUY MORE STRATEGY
its called "averaging down" or "shorting"
buy the dip and hold or buy low sell high="going long"
sell the high buy the correction="shorting"
also if you look more into your "little recap of 3 cycles"
you will notice the bottom of cycle 2 did not drop below high of cycle 1
you will notice the bottom of cycle 3 did not drop below high of cycle 2
so when you use an example of time sell of upto $100k. (then corrects) then buy above $50k..
you might want to aim your target at sell upto/above $140k (then corrects) then buy above $70k
buy the dip and hold or buy low sell high="going long"
sell the high buy the correction="shorting"
also if you look more into your "little recap of 3 cycles"
you will notice the bottom of cycle 2 did not drop below high of cycle 1
you will notice the bottom of cycle 3 did not drop below high of cycle 2
so when you use an example of time sell of upto $100k. (then corrects) then buy above $50k..
you might want to aim your target at sell upto/above $140k (then corrects) then buy above $70k
No, shorting is when you bet against an asset and you "borrow" (virtually on the exchange using a perpetual contract for example) at a given price and then pay back the virtual loan later. If the price goes down you make money because you now pay a lower price for what you borrowed and you cash in the difference. You lose money if the price goes up though. It is quite different from what you describe. You need a future contract to do shorting. Also averaging down has nothing to do with shorting. Maybe you should learn trading terminology before telling others what it is.
short is opposite to long... [grammer, logic, physics]
people are not required to obtain extra coin to short if they already have coin
those who already have coin can short their own coin(no borrowing required)
only those without coin need to obtain(borrow) coin to short
you can short without leverage thus not need to use futures contracts..
futures contracts are just the contracts for the borrowers to borrow under contracts..
shorting and futures are different things.
i have hoards of coins myself so dont need to borrow but i can short my own hoard just by selling on spot market, waiting for the correction and buying in cheaper
shorting is not dependant on borrowing. but if you dont have coin upfront to perform a short THEN you need to borrow coin to perform a short
It is grammar.
No, shorting is a very precise trading term. If you sell, you sell, that has nothing to do with shorting.
Yes, with crypto the only to short is doing it with a contract. Shorting requires borrowing in fact if you pay fees to short a coin.
Please check online the definition of the term.
Selling high and buying when the market deeps is simply trading and what any trader should do, lol. What do you suggest buying at the top and selling at the bottom instead?
Re: [Strategy of Dr.Bitcoin_Strange] BITCOIN'S SELL TO BUY MORE STRATEGY
its called "averaging down" or "shorting"
buy the dip and hold or buy low sell high="going long"
sell the high buy the correction="shorting"
also if you look more into your "little recap of 3 cycles"
you will notice the bottom of cycle 2 did not drop below high of cycle 1
you will notice the bottom of cycle 3 did not drop below high of cycle 2
so when you use an example of time sell of upto $100k. (then corrects) then buy above $50k..
you might want to aim your target at sell upto/above $140k (then corrects) then buy above $70k
buy the dip and hold or buy low sell high="going long"
sell the high buy the correction="shorting"
also if you look more into your "little recap of 3 cycles"
you will notice the bottom of cycle 2 did not drop below high of cycle 1
you will notice the bottom of cycle 3 did not drop below high of cycle 2
so when you use an example of time sell of upto $100k. (then corrects) then buy above $50k..
you might want to aim your target at sell upto/above $140k (then corrects) then buy above $70k
No, shorting is when you bet against an asset and you "borrow" (virtually on the exchange using a perpetual contract for example) at a given price and then pay back the virtual loan later. If the price goes down you make money because you now pay a lower price for what you borrowed and you cash in the difference. You lose money if the price goes up though. It is quite different from what you describe. You need a future contract to do shorting. Also averaging down has nothing to do with shorting. Maybe you should learn trading terminology before telling others what it is.
It's working until it stops working just like the 100 or 200 Moving Average which was supposedly to hold Bitcoin at $22k in 2022. What happened? It broke and Bitcoin went as low as $15k.
So everything will work until one day, when it will suddenly stop working. I am sure it was the same case with the PlanB guy or something? I don't remember his name exactly.
So everything will work until one day, when it will suddenly stop working. I am sure it was the same case with the PlanB guy or something? I don't remember his name exactly.
It has worked for 15 years. What I'm trying to explain is that we are dealing with a power law. I gave many links to people, please really look at the videos because there is incredibly valuable info. Power Law are stable and actually, as the system grows it becomes more stable. It is not another formula.
showing links to the same falsehoods is not proof. its just circling the same trashcan
your "law" has changed over the years. and even with changes becomes LESS accurate
even a toddler can see how your lines don't even match the lows and highs of the market even after you edit the chart(adjusting numbers variably) to try to make the chart fit a straight line
The links is to a mathematical proof that the value converges. You don't understand why that is fundamental to prove the model works.
Why do you argue? It is like me walking in a baseball professional team and telling them how to play basketball.
The top line is not supposed to match the highs of the market. It is evident they don't follow a trend. The decay can also be modelled but it is not what the lines are trying to do. They are trying to do the second best thing that is to identify places where the price is too high and it is a good idea to disinvest.
These are areas that show that if the price goes above 200 % of the trend line is time to sell. I tried to explain this to you 1000 times. It is a reference point. It gives a simple recipe for DCA. The bottom line perfectly indicates the bottom instead it catches all the major bottoms and in fact, the general path during bear follow the bottom line. It is stochastic again so please do not tell me a few points went below because it is completely idiotic.
I'm trying to do my best to teach you because I'm an ex-professor so I'm trying to be patient and calm but you are really really annoying.