Reddit Posts
Bitget and Arkis Partner to Expand Capital-Efficient Institutional Trading
The most popular way investors look at charts and it's flaw [SERIOUS]
Cryptocurrency Market Update - October 02 2023
Cryptocurrency Market Update - October 02, 2023
Bitcoin's Move Below 20-DMA Possible Short-Term Bearish Signal
While we have indeed flipped many indicators bullish since last month, there are still some major tests remaining. Don’t get too excited too soon.
We are once again seeing a growth in the New Addresses metric after nearly two years (!)of slower or negative growth. This is quite bullish.
Rugpulls in Crypto market and how exchanges are trying to protect their users from Rugpulls
Bitcoin's hash ribbons have flashed a buy signal for the first time since August 2021, marking the end of a 2+ month-long period of miner capitulation and deep pressure on miner's margins
The crypto market experienced a relief rally over the last week. Will the short-term momentum spark a further rally or is the weight of the current macro environment too heavy to overcome? Let's look at the data.
Here are two indicators that worked pretty well in the past - is the bottom already in?
Mentions
Because some people are not only looking at patterns but also at different indicators. Almost all indicators that are statistically significant in Bitcoin are confirming a turnaround into either accumulation or the next bullrun. This never happened in any cycle with the bear market continuing. The only bearish indicator left is the 200DMA at $82k. Once the daily closes above that, the bear market is officially dead.
The credit/pool-content distinction is correct in general. But it applies to the input_pool, which is not what urandom reads. Tracing the path in random.c (Lenny 2.6.26): urandom_read at 1003-1005 calls extract_entropy_user with &nonblocking_pool. extract_entropy_user at 829 calls xfer_secondary_pool first, then account on nonblocking_pool, then extract_buf on nonblocking_pool. The IRQ jitter you're describing gets mixed into input_pool by add_interrupt_randomness, but it only reaches nonblocking_pool through xfer_secondary_pool, and that path is credit-gated. xfer_secondary_pool at 685, called with r=&nonblocking_pool, n=32: rsvd = r->limit ? 0 : random_read_wakeup_thresh/4 = 64/4 = 16 (nonblocking_pool.limit is 0) bytes = max(32, 64/8) = 32 extract_entropy(&input_pool, tmp, 32, min=8, reserved=16) Then account at 723, on input_pool, with min=8, reserved=16: if (input_pool.entropy_count/8 < min + reserved) // line 737 nbytes = 0 min + reserved = 24 bytes = 192 bits. If input_pool.entropy_count is below 192, the function returns 0 bytes. mix_pool_bytes at 706 gets called with 0 bytes, credit_entropy_bits at 707 with 0. nonblocking_pool gets nothing from input_pool. So the question reduces to: does input_pool.entropy_count reach 192 bits before bitcoind's first urandom read on a Lenny Live USB headless boot? Sources of credited entropy to input_pool in that scenario: - init_std_data at 886-898: mixes ktime + utsname into input_pool but does not call credit_entropy_bits. Credit added: 0. - add_disk_randomness at 657: only fires for disks where disk->random is set. rand_initialize_disk at 926 sets it via add_disk_randomness_flag, which most USB storage drivers in 2.6.26 do not assert for the boot device. Credit from USB squashfs reads: typically 0. - add_input_randomness: keyboard/mouse, not present in headless. - add_interrupt_randomness at 647 -> add_timer_randomness at 572: This runs but the credit is fls(min(d1,d2,d3)>>1) capped at 11, per line 624-625. For sequential, periodic IRQs (USB controller DMA completions, timer ticks) the second and third deltas collapse to ~0 and the credit per IRQ rounds to 0. Real credit comes from genuinely jittered IRQs, which are sparse pre- bitcoind on a quiet headless boot. The entropy_count crossing 192 before first urandom read isn't impossible but it's not the default. It depends on how many genuinely jittered IRQs fire and how much they get credited. If the threshold isn't crossed, nonblocking_pool stays seeded only by its own init_std_data (line 904) plus deterministic extract_buf self-feedback from any prior /dev/urandom reads in the same boot. That's the model. The cooperative-input search space targets nonblocking_pool's reachable state under this gating assumption. Empirical test of this is straightforward and the right thing to do. Instrument the kernel to log input_pool.entropy_count at the moment of first urandom read. If credit is below 192 across N boots of a controlled Lenny Live USB image, the gating holds and the IRQ-jitter content of input_pool is irrelevant to urandom output. If credit reaches 192, transfer happens, and the model needs the IRQ contribution. Either result is informative. I'm running this as part of the VM test you proposed. Will report back with input_pool.entropy_count samples across reboots. If your simulator port is bit-exact against openssl-0.9.8g trace, I'd like to compare divergence. Send the repo when ready and I'll send my md_rand emulator (Python + CUDA, both validated against the same trace approach).
**Credit is not the same thing as pool content.** The line you quoted from `add_timer_randomness` in 2.6.26 is preceded by: ```c sample.jiffies = jiffies; sample.cycles = get_cycles(); sample.num = num; mix_pool_bytes(&input_pool, &sample, sizeof(sample)); ``` `mix_pool_bytes` unconditionally hashes the full sample (jiffies + cycles + num) into the pool. The delta filter that follows only updates `entropy_count`, the credit accountant. The pool content is not gated by credit. This matters because OpenSSL `RAND_poll` reads `/dev/urandom`, not `/dev/random`. `/dev/urandom` runs `extract_buf` over the entire 512-byte pool regardless of `entropy_count`. The output is `SHA-1(pool || ...)`. If you want to predict that output, you need to know what's in the pool, not what the credit counter says. So when you compute "10s to 100s of jittered IRQs × 2-5 bits credited each = 100-500 bits", that's the credit accountant's number. It's not a bound on the pool's predictability. **get_cycles at IRQ time carries jitter that survives the delta filter.** You're right that on a Penryn without nonstop_tsc the TSC isn't calibrated and the absolute TSC value during early boot is dominated by linear accumulation. But the value mixed into the pool is `get_cycles()` *at the moment the IRQ fires*. The jitter in "moment-of-IRQ" relative to predicted-boot-timing is what's captured. For a USB DMA completion IRQ during initrd unpack: the request was issued at TSC value `T_issue`, the IRQ fires at `T_issue + delta_controller`, where `delta_controller` is the controller's actual completion latency. That latency varies by ~100-1000 cycles per request based on queue state, bus contention, USB protocol timing, host-controller microarchitecture state. Two boots of identical hardware produce different `delta_controller` for nominally identical requests. The kernel's delta filter looks at successive `(jiffies_now - jiffies_prev)` differences. With 4ms jiffies and microsecond-scale IRQ rates, deltas are 0 for fast IRQs, the d2/d3 differences collapse, and credit goes to 0. But `sample.cycles` for each IRQ is still the high-res TSC, mixed unconditionally. The 5-10 bits of cycles-jitter per IRQ go into the pool whether or not they're credited. **Pool-mixed cumulative bytes during a Live USB boot.** Hundreds of disk-IRQ samples × ~16 bytes per sample = a few KB hashed into the 512-byte pool by the time userspace starts. Of those bytes, the jiffies and `num` fields are largely cooperation-pinnable (you know the IRQ count and approximate timing). The cycles fields are not. If we're being conservative on the cycles entropy: 100 IRQs × 5 bits unknown = 500 bits. If we're being less conservative: 1000 IRQs × 8 bits = 8000 bits. Reality is probably between these, depending on Live USB image and hardware. The "thousands" framing was imprecise; "hundreds-to-low-thousands" is closer. That's still much larger than the 36-43 bits implied by your 10^11-10^13 bound, and it's the part that constrains the recovery path. **The early-boot clocksource window doesn't change what's in the pool at OpenSSL-init time.** `clocksource_select` running late is true and doesn't matter for this question. By the time bitcoind launches and OpenSSL does its first `RAND_poll`, all the early-boot IRQs have already mixed into the pool. The pool at *that moment* is what determines the first 32 bytes of `/dev/urandom`. Whatever clocksource was active when the IRQs fired doesn't retroactively change the pool content. **Empirical test framing.** This is the right way to resolve it and I think we agree on the protocol. Concrete proposal: Lenny VM with: - virtio-rng disabled - KVM with deterministic launch (`-snapshot`, `-rtc base=2010-08-09T20:00:00`) - Live USB image emulated via virtio-blk reading a fixed image - bitcoin-0.3.2 built and launched at a fixed offset from boot - Capture first 32 bytes of `/dev/urandom` at OpenSSL init time, plus the change-key and signing nonce of a fixed test transaction Run N times with identical parameters. If outputs are byte-identical across runs, the unknown is in your "12 parameters" set and your bound holds. If they differ, the difference is in IRQ-jitter mixing that cooperation can't pin. I'll send the simulator source. Concretely what's there: * `MdRand.cs`: bit-exact port of `crypto/rand/md_rand.c` (stir-pool, pid mixing, exact MD update order, md_count[2] handling, global-md update semantics for both add and bytes) * `openssl_validation/oracle.c`: links against real openssl-0.9.8g, emits a deterministic trace * `Program.cs --validate-openssl <trace>`: replays the trace through MdRand, must match byte-for-byte If anything in that port doesn't match real OpenSSL output for your parameter set, that's a bug to fix before either of us trusts the C# side. The kernel `random.c` side I haven't bit-exact-ported because the simulator's job stops at OpenSSL's RAND_poll input; the kernel question is what we should resolve in the VM.
Two technical corrections on (2) and (3) that change the analysis significantly. First, the delta-filter in add_interrupt_randomness. Looking at drivers/char/random.c add_timer_randomness in 2.6.26 (this is what add_interrupt_randomness ends up calling): delta = sample.jiffies - state->last_time; delta2 = delta - state->last_delta; delta3 = delta2 - state->last_delta2; ... delta = min(delta, delta2); delta = min(delta, delta3); credit_entropy_bits(r, fls(delta) - 1); Three-stage difference. Credit is fls(min(d1, d2, d3)) - 1. For regular periodic IRQs (d1 ~ constant, d2 ~ 0, d3 ~ 0) this evaluates to 0. The kernel deliberately does not credit predictable timing as entropy. USB sequential block reads during initrd unpacking are the predictable case. The USB host controller delivers DMA completion IRQs at near-constant intervals. d2 and d3 collapse. Per-IRQ entropy credit is near zero, not 10-15 bits. The IRQs that contribute are the ones with real jitter - preemption, controller hiccups, allocator latency variance. On a fresh boot these are sparse. Order of 10s to 100s of genuinely jittered IRQs over the pre-bitcoind window, each contributing 2-5 bits credited. Cumulative pre-bitcoind entropy contribution from disk IRQs is closer to 100-500 bits raw, which is bounded further by the entropy estimator's conservatism and the 4096-bit pool's saturation behavior. Still non-zero, but not "thousands of bits dominating the state" the way your reading framed it. Second, the clocksource argument needs unpacking by phase. clocksource_select doesn't run until time_init in start_kernel, well into boot. Before that, jiffies is the only clock available. init_std_data and the earliest IRQs that hit add_interrupt_randomness happen during this window on 2.6.26. get_cycles() is called but on a Penryn without nonstop_tsc during early boot the TSC isn't calibrated yet, isn't synced across cores, and the values it returns are dominated by linear boot-time tick accumulation rather than jitter. So: early-boot IRQ entropy contributions go through the delta filter against a near-linear TSC, and most fail the predictability test. By the time bitcoind launches, clocksource selection has finished, TSC (or HPET if TSC fails the stability check) is active. But the bulk of disk IRQs from initrd/squashfs unpack have already happened in the early window. Net: the pre-bitcoind pool entropy isn't 6000+ bits. It's a small input_pool seed (init_std_data: ktime + utsname), plus a small number of credited IRQs that survived the delta filter, plus whatever userspace activity bitcoind itself triggers before its first RAND_poll. This is exactly why the search bound is bounded enough to discuss seriously, and why pinning the laptop model and timing matters - it constrains the small-but-nonzero IRQ contribution window. I'll still run the empirical test you proposed (Lenny VM with virtio-rng disabled, deterministic reboot reproducibility) because the argument is theoretical and the test is concrete. But the theoretical case for thousands of bits of pre-bitcoind pool entropy on a Live USB boot doesn't hold once you account for the delta filter and the early-boot clocksource state.
I bought the amount I wanted in 2019 but it was a lot for me at the time. I rode out the covid crash where I saw it get cut in half. When it got back to break even I told myself it was too volatile and sold 1/2 my bag. I’ve kept most of the other half and kicking myself now that I got scared into selling. I don’t need the money and it just went into other investments that didn’t do as well. Now I now better and DCA. And when it’s cheap relative to the 200 DMA I like to up the DCA.
tldr; Bitget, the world's largest Universal Exchange, has partnered with Arkis, an institutional digital asset prime brokerage, to enhance capital-efficient institutional trading. The collaboration introduces Direct Market Access (DMA) to Bitget within Arkis's unified margin framework, allowing institutions to trade and finance positions through a single portfolio-based margin model. This integration aims to improve capital utilization, reduce margin fragmentation, and streamline risk management for professional trading firms across centralized and decentralized venues. *This summary is auto generated by a bot and not meant to replace reading the original article. As always, DYOR.
[On chain volume](<iframe width="100%" height="420" frameborder="0" src="https://www.theblock.co/data/on-chain-metrics/bitcoin/bitcoins-adjusten-on-chain-volume-daily/embed" title="Bitcoin's On-Chain Volume (Daily, 7DMA)"></iframe>) correlates pretty well it looks like to me.
There will definitely be a lot of buying at the 200 DMA for sure.
Bull run to where? New ATH? Dead Cats Bounce? 200 DMA? 50 WMA? 100K? Any further analysis than just bull run? What data are you developing your thesis from?
If you judge by breadth (top 30 mostly red on 1Y), yeah — that’s a bear-ish read, especially for alts. But I wouldn’t call the whole market “bear” unless BTC is also losing the long-term trend filter (like the 200DMA) and failing to reclaim key levels. Lately it’s felt more like “BTC-led chop + altcoin pain” than a clean bull or bear. https://preview.redd.it/60kdpdnwjx7g1.png?width=1280&format=png&auto=webp&s=48c19fc8165ab506dc0b9b8098579b2c37bf6bff
CME gap, death cross, 50 day SMA, 200 day SMA, DMA, MA crossovers, Fibonacci retracement, head and shoulders knees and toes, 1s chart. Am I missing anything in my arsenal?
It’s going to hit the 95K supply, could get a sharp V. Either way we have until Sunday at midnight to close above the 50 DMA. That’s a 6-7K move from 95K.
If Bitcoin triggers the 98K stop losses and rebounds to close above the 50 DMA this week then we’re going to rocket into eoy
It’s just another story for people to launch cryptos and try to boost their coins off. If you understand crypto you know it’s low bandwidth, high latency and slow to converge. If you know about the technology AI firms are trying to use, specialized networking to connect massive GPU clusters together directly for lowest possible DMA etc, you’ll understand why it’s probably the worst application you could possible consider running on a blockchain.
Sell when Fear and Greed index is over 70, RSI and Stochcastic overbought (near 70). Buy at key resistances, DMA100 or 200, RSI and Stochcastic are oversold (near 30), etc.
"What is there to be good at?" Here is some recommended reading for you to begin your journey as a trader: Market Microstructure Theory — Maureen O’Hara, 1995 Trading and Exchanges — Larry Harris, 2003 Algorithmic Trading and DMA — Barry Johnson, 2010 Quantitative Trading — Ernest Chan, 2009 Algorithmic Trading — Ernest Chan, 2013 High-Frequency Trading — Irene Aldridge, 2009 Trading in the Zone — Mark Douglas, 2000 Fooled by Randomness — Nassim Taleb, 2001 The Psychology of Trading — Brett Steenbarger, 2002 When Genius Failed — Roger Lowenstein, 2000 Flash Boys — Michael Lewis, 2014 Reminiscences of a Stock Operator — Edwin Lefèvre, 1923 Good luck.
Waiting for 50DMA. At least
Huge volume being traded right now at the 20 DMA. Looks like we might test 110 soon if you are looking to buy more in the short term.
The 100 DMA is $96.3k. It has touched or gone below the 100 DMA about 6 times (so says GPT) this past year 🤷♂️
I will check later for more information, but i code using C++ (as usual for arduinos) and i use some libs: `<WiFi.h>` `<ESP32-HUB75-MatrixPanel-I2S-DMA.h>` `<time.h>` And to use them, i'm using this lib in the arduino IDE ESP32-HUB75-MatrixPanel-I2S-DMA
Help please. On this page: https://www.tradingview.com/symbols/BTCUSD/technicals/?exchange=COINBASE I can see a "Simple Moving Average (200)" at 96,218.75. On this page: https://www.barchart.com/crypto/quotes/%5EBTCUSD/technical-analysis it shows the 200 day moving average at 90,836.20. That's a 6% discrepancy. How is that possible? What is the real 200DMA? And how can anyone be sure?
Help please. On this page: https://www.tradingview.com/symbols/BTCUSD/technicals/?exchange=COINBASE I can see a "Simple Moving Average (200)" at 96,218.75. On this page: https://www.barchart.com/crypto/quotes/%5EBTCUSD/technical-analysis it shows the 200 day moving average at 90,836.20. That's a 6% discrepancy. How is that possible? What is the real 200DMA? And how can anyone be sure?
Pay more attention the 200 DMA. $69k was the last cycle peak. That's more or less your goal.
bro at least post a 100 DMA or if you really wanna get your learn on, look at a historical chart of BTC fees [https://bitinfocharts.com/comparison/transactionfees-price-btc.html#alltime](https://bitinfocharts.com/comparison/transactionfees-price-btc.html#alltime) See anything that worries you? Hint: fees matter whenever they get over $10/tx
Congratulations on joining the community. Enjoy your $15k being down 50% for the next 18 months before MAYBE getting back close to even money. How rude your boss is and how much shit you have to take from him is of no concern to the overall crypto market right now that has already exhausted all near term catalysts to the upside. Learn the technicals and understand what and where BTC’s 200 DMA is before dumping all your free cash into it. You would have been better off buying treasuries or a Rolex. Have a nice day!
Yes we do. The Bitcoin PI Top Indicator had shown Bitcoin's bull run price high every cycle. When the The 111-Day Moving Average (111DMA) and the 350-Day Moving Average Multiplied by 2 (350DMA x2) touch/cross, it indicates the end of every bull cycle. We are not even close. [PI Cycle Top Indicator ](https://charts.bitbo.io/pi-cycle-top/)
Stock market had the worst capitulation in last 24 hours that has been seen in a decade. SPX has hit the 200 DMA. Not the time to be in the market, get out now folks! Don't tell me I didn't warn you!
I'm going to keep saying it because I don't think people really pay attention to it. But until the 111-Day Moving Average (111DMA) and the 350-Day Moving Average Multiplied by 2 (350DMA x2) cross on the PI top indicator, we are not even close to the end of the Bitcoin bull cycle.
The cycle is far from over. The PI top indicator shows that. The 111-Day Moving Average (111DMA) and the 350-Day Moving Average Multiplied by 2 (350DMA x2) are nowhere close to touching, which has indicated the end of every bull cycle. We are just in a common cycle drawback.
> By the time you see a 200DMA it's too...fucking...late...to do anything about it. If we are going back to 30k or whatever then I would argue a sell indicator at 80k is pretty helpful. Unless I'm misunderstanding what you're saying.
It's not a great indicator, no, but look at the fucking patterns. Look at the two peaks where BTC surpassed the ATH. It happens twice and rarely thrice. By the time you see a 200DMA it's too...fucking...late...to do anything about it.
The paywalled doc would discuss the 50DMA, 200DMA, consolidation, possible retest, and breakout above 108.
Bruv, do you even understand what sending packets of info around means? The information doesn't travel on a magic carpet into your GPU, it has to go from the network interface buffer into the CPU and the be transfered or DMA:d into a GPU buffer until it can finally be processed... then you have to do the same process all over again in order to send your newly computed data over to another computer. It would most likely be around 10,000,000,000x slower to do it like that then just distributing it locally between your GPUs [https://gist.github.com/jboner/2841832](https://gist.github.com/jboner/2841832)
I bought more when I saw it go into the low $90s. Pullbacks happen. Buy more. We are nowhere near the cycle top. And I say that confidently because the 111-Day Moving Average (111DMA) and the 350-Day Moving Average Multiplied by 2 (350DMA x2) are nowhere near each other. Those two crossing indicates the cycle top every time.
200 DMA is support 72980, I bet a shiny penny it never gets there.
There's no fixed answer man. You can look up STH cost basis, 200DMA, STH MVRV, STH SOPR etc.
The PI chart indicator is interesting but i hear what you're saying. For 2021 it only captures the April-May high and not the actual ATH in November of 2021. So while not a perfect tool, it does appear that it could be helpful. If the 111 day average spikes so abruptly while the 350DMA is already in upward momentum, it's a good indicator that it's time to sell or rotate money from BTC into alts. I suppose we'll see if it is helpful this bull run.
Eh, it is freaky until you look into the math. Then you realize that it is most likely just a coincidence: given any curve that has periodic/cyclic oscillations, you will always find some M- and N-moving average, or some multiple of theirs, such that they cross exactly in two prescribed points. In this case, the two curves that worked well enough to match the two peaks on the BTC chart are 2x350DMA and the 111DMA... Did they come up with these numbers with some reasoning? No, simply trial and error until they found those two curves that had to exist... But the fact that they cross near those peaks doesn't mean they will cross again near the next one, at all. It's like drawing a line through two points that were already known and expecting that the third one will lie on it too. It might but it would be out of luck if we managed to actually derive a meaningful law based on a fitting through two points, no matter how fancy we made such fitting. Also the connection with π is nothing but an attempt to legitimate this coincidental fact by linking it to a famous mathematical constant: 350/111 = 3.153... Is this π? Eh, if you ignore the fact that the 350DMA needs to be multiplied by 2, and that π = 3.1412 (so this random value is almost 6% off!).
Thank you, yes using both to gauge the top might pay off. Looks like the current RSI is at 78, so still some way off from 90, which’d indicate overbought. Current 111 DMA is 71k whereas the 350 DMA x2 is 126k. So still some way to go.
No clue what to expect this week / month, but we aren't too far off the 200DMA. Market doesn't seem overheated. 7 months of chop chop did its job.
Did they really have to remove it though or are they just shittifying it to get people angry against their gov? I choose Google as my engine and Chrome as my browser, I should be able to choose if I want Google Maps integrated or not. The DMA restricts companies from forcing consumers or developers to use certain services as part of a larger package, ok don't force me, but at least give me the chance.
> In order to comply with the EU Digital Markets Act (DMA), we made changes to Google Search in European Economic Area (EEA). Maps that may appear in Search results do not link to Google Maps (example 1). The Maps link at the top of the Search page that links to Google Maps has been removed (example 2). Google published a blog about compliance with the DMA. Here's the link to the blog if you'd like to learn more: https://blog.google/around-the-globe/google-europe/complying-with-the-digital-markets-act/. Same in the US markets. All the big tech corps are being pummeled by antitrust regulations, and none of them want to increase their risk.
Traders made sure to flushhhhh the 200DMA to confirme bullrun to 90k
Just stop checking your portfolio every few minutes/hours/days and it will help a lot DMA in set intervals and thats it. Most importantly dont invest money you actually need, as in money you want back someday. Think of it as lost and maybe something nice returns
Do what I do. You have no idea which way btc is going to move on any given day so concentrate on daily trends and buy or hold day to day. The key is to buy small amounts every day perhaps more frequently. You can buy as little as $10. Say you start out the day as a baseline btc is at 55k. Buy a small amount. Bitcoin goes up 1k by dinner time. Buy another small amount. By bedtime btc is up another 250 - upward trend buy no more. Wake up in morning. Price is at 58k. Buy same small amount. But look, the price drops 1k in 90 minutes - buy same small amount. Price goes now to 56k - buy again. Price to 55k - buy again even if the price drop happened 20 minutes later. On Sunday 8.4 when btc dropped $11k in 18 hours? I bought 9 times - every purchase was at least 800 to 1k lower than the previous. I go $100 a throw. The key is buy a lot when the price drops dramatically and more slowly when the price rises on a daily basis. Even if the dropping price is more than the previous day. This is not about buying in a fixed time period or dropping a thousand a month no matter the price either. Small amounts frequently in a downward trend. Also, No G-d candles, no fibonacci patterns, no 50 DMA crosses the 200 DMA. I don't believe half that stuff just get a feel for the market and simply buy cheaper rather than more expensive - on a relative basis. If you see the price moon buy several times as the price goes up just not as quickly. The next day the price is up again go ahead and buy to start the day and see which direction it goes. This takes active management. I check prices every half hour on iphone. Account with swan. I have fun with it. Turned it into a hobby. Hopefully this gives you a couple of ideas on how to approach your buying discipline.
I agree I have limit alerts set each time Bitcoin drops under 61500 (the 200 DMA) and by a little at a time and more if it drops. IMO stop looking at price market makers will win and liquidate you easily keeping us from the real goal of stacking for years away.
DMA and cross nothing else
Why? Bitcoin price is typically above the 200 day moving average. There has only been 5 times when Bitcoin price dropped below the 200 DMA and usually indicates a bull market. How? Look at the trend line on a chart. Google “Bitcoin 200 day moving average chart” and then compare the Bitcoin price to the 200 DMA.
I feel nothing any more, bring it on... Looking to bottom at 59K (0.618 Fib) or 57K (50 DMA). If lower, even better. BTW. Growing your own weed will be legal in Germany from April 1st.
The long pattern is still intact because of this short term pullback, we are bouncing around the 350x2 DMA for those who care about technicals. Very bullish turkish …, its a multi month setup
It does not forecast the top because it depends on how quickly price moves up. The indicator flashes when the 111 DMA meets the 350 DMA. IT has been accurate to within 3 days of the top the last 2 cycles.
Sounds like someone born in a post plug n play era would say. You missed out on the fun of manually configuring DMA, IRQ, and IO ports for those fun expansions card and peripherals.
What is the 200DMA on a Big Mac?
S&P crossed the 200 DMA to the negative, buckle up, will money move to BTC as a hedge?
BTC 200 DMA is just above $28k now..see if BTC holds it!
I bought some at $57k. But really bought low points. Average is like $3k below where we're at. DCAing around 200 DMA
Up 27,1k ripping through all over leveraged shorts. Then supply will decide whether it continues to 28k or drops below 50DMA It’s honestly that simple at least for today and this week
TOTAL3 is the market cap for alts. TOTAL is all crypto, TOTAL2 is all crypto excl BTC, TOTAL3 is all crypto excl BTC and ETH. TOTAL3 is what you need to follow to know what's happening with money moving into the alt market. The natural movement of money is TOTAL to TOTAL2 to TOTAL3. So essentially money rotates from BTC to ETH to alts...when it gets to alts it is what is known as an alt season. DMA is Daily chart and the Moving Average. 50 is the length of the average, so avg price over the previous 50 days. Sorry I wasn't exactly sure what you did or did not know so touched on all of it. If it helps, that's great. If you already knew, then even better :)
What's the total3 50 DMA ? Is this an indicator chart ?
Alts will start to rise eventually, but now might not be the best time. When "further downside" stops being a thing, that's when to buy. Better to buy on the way up. We're still under TOTAL3 50 DMA, still trending down. If you wait until it starts trending up, sure you won't catch the absolute bottom, but you're massively reduce any risk of further downside
tldr; Quick Take As Bitcoin’s price hovers around $26,000, technical indicators suggest a death cross is imminent, a situation defined by the 50-day moving average (DMA) falling below the 200 DMA. Currently, the 50dma is around $27,625, strikingly close to the 200dma at $27,618. This impending event is a signal of weakening price momentum, often associated […] The post Bitcoin about to witness sixth death cross in 5 yrs appeared first on CryptoSlate. *This summary is auto generated by a bot and not meant to replace reading the original article. As always, DYOR.
EU hasn’t designated Apple as a gatekeeper, so as of today, DMA won’t have any impact on App Store. Might change, but right now that article is plain wrong.
After 15 months of intense negotiations, the Digital Markets Act (DMA) becomes the first significant law to regulate digital gatekeepers. The DMA will limit the power of Big Tech and open the digital world to new and upcoming apps and services.
These are all the same simple MAs the 20DMA vs 50DMA. The dates are individual instances of the 20dma going above the 50dma. I personally don't think the crossovers are very meaningful or a great indicator. The time of the cycle is more important in my opinion. Days 950 to days 400....around 14 months before and after the halving date are good times to be all in.
tldr; Ethereum (ETH) gas fees jumped to a 10-month high — prompted by a surge in meme coin mania. Per Glassnode, the median Ethereum gas price over a seven-day moving average (7DMA) reached 43.641 gwei — a price last seen on June 30, 2022. Gwei is a denomination of ETH — with 1,000,000,000 gwei equaling 1 […] The post Meme season blamed for jump in Ethereum (ETH) gas fees appeared first on CryptoSlate. *This summary is auto generated by a bot and not meant to replace reading the original article. As always, DYOR.*
20 day DMA ffs. I’d only be concerned if it went back below the 20 week DMA
From a technical analysis perspective, BTC has been bullish since about January. Thats when price crossed over the 200DMA. If you look at the 1M chart youll see that this “crash” was just a long term pull back to the 50month MA. Historically price has never lost the 50 month MA and history is again repeating itself. All signs point to bullish
Its definitely bullish from a TA standpoint with regards to price trading over the 200DMA. Also price has never been below the 50 month MA historically. Price is now pushing away from the 50 month MA as it has done before ever prior bull run
> i was not trying to claim that a DMA attack would have control over cold wallet Don't play dumb. >*VapingLawrence* *The keys never leave the HW wallet, no matter the malware. It's physically impossible.* *The only possible way to crack these things is to break them open and tap into the electronics and even then there are safeguards and encryptions in place.* To which you replied >No that is not even close to true, Direct memory access attacks DMA for one, Keep trying to backtrack and hide your stupidity behind walls of text. You keep using terms and concepts to support your arguments when folks call you out, and instead of admitting that maybe you need to read up on things a bit, you double down and call others stupid. This might work when you're around people who don't know IT, but your Best Buy Geek Squad education doesn't cut it here.
Ok you are still trying argue something i did not come here to argue, i use a hardware wallet and believe they are 100% secure, with that said there is nothing basic about dma attacks, i have studied them for a long time and still dont understand 2% of it, i was not trying to claim that a DMA attack would have control over cold wallet i cant speak on that, but i can tell you that DMA attack gains access to every piece of hardware connected to the motherboard at the hardware level this is much more then just reading the ram, every day these attackers get better what i was implying is that if allowed to compromise your pc they will not give up until they find a way in, maybe the hard way maybe the easy way by tricking the user, every thing i talked about was designed to strengthen your devices and network to keep that type of dedicated attacker out of your device's, your already safe from standard malware that was not my concern, i hope we can find middle ground here somewhere
I know how DMA works. It's a basic concept that is covered in IT security. Your private key is never sent from the hardware wallet to the computer's RAM. A DMA attack is when an external device gains access to PC/s RAM. If no private key is sitting in RAM, then a DMA attack doesn't matter. It's not a difficult concept.
Lol wiki DMA is very advanced far too advanced for me to comment on but i will say i have seen attacks demonstrated on youtube where any device connected was available to the attacker at the hardware level below encryption, i came to talk about the weak spots that hardware wallets cant protect you from and how to protect ourselves from those weak spots, if you have a new pc your bios will have options for IOMMU and dma protection which will greatly assist the hardware wallet in protecting it self from dma attacks, this is all im qualified to speak about dma, but dns is something i have studied extensively
Ok sorry i was rude, but i stand by what i said and will glady elaborate, the closed source operations of tpm chips and algorithms ect are beyond my pay grade so i cannot say what an attacker will have access to with a DMA attack all i can say is that once an attacker is inside your network they will find a way they wont stop ever and they are getting so damn good its scary, in my opinion we should be strengthening every weak spot we can and not just relying on the firmware of a hardware wallet to stand up to a dedicated attacker with full control of your network, yes i believe ledger is secure and designed to never send the keys anywhere this is not what i came here to discuss, sorry again i was rude
A DMA attack is when an external device gains access to the Computer's memory. It's literally an attack in the opposite direction of what would be needed to extract private keys from a hardware wallet.
DMA attacks are wide and scary category of attacks ranging from simple in person evil maid attacks to cutting edge whole system infiltration where they read not just the ram on the fly at the hardware level, this is beyond my pay grade, the point of post was about DNS not DMA
>I think you should read up a lil more on DMA Tell me exactly how you think a DMA attack would extract the private key from a hardware wallet.
I think you should read up a lil more on DMA but like i said i did not come here to suggest the breaking jnto the hardware wallet i came here to discuss everything else but that, everyone keeps saying the same things, im not here to say hardware wallets dont work they are perfect and mandatory im here to talk about the other weak spots BEFORE and after the hardware wallet, i hope we can agree on that at least, if you check my posts or ask questions you will see im not a noob who thinks the coins are on my wallet i have been in tech and crypto for many years now it is what i do, my OPsec is top notch and i came here to help people on there security journey
Tricking the user to sign the transaction is entirely different thing and has nothing to do with the wallet he/she uses. Yes, these attacks work because mind is the weakest link in the chain. So... what exactly can you achieve with DMA attack?
>No that is not even close to true, Direct memory access attacks DMA for one, LOL A DMA attack would only work if the private key is sent to your PC's RAM. But a hardware wallet **never sends the private key to your PC's RAM.** That's the whole goddamn point. You are like the poster child for Dunning–Kruger effect.
No that is not even close to true, Direct memory access attacks DMA for one, but first of all i was suggesting malware that tricks the user, this is what we have seen lately, but i was also pointing out the increased efforts of attackers to target the crypto space and as crypto grows it will draw even more, i also brought up the plans of the WEF
I have nitro key with my encrypted boot partition and secure keys stored, i fundamentally understand how the tpm chip works in my pc, i have DMA protection to prevent DMA attacks and usb disabled, i fully understand the strengths and weakness of a hardware wallet, do you?
On my chart it actually had a wick below the 220 DMA, so time will tell. I'll be more confident if it bounces again.
If you look at the 200 DMA and recent triple top on the 30 day volume resistance levels, then it’s pretty obvious that I have no idea what I’m even saying right now
Yes the market is bleeding, but if you look at the 120 DMA which crossed the 60 day fib line, with 24.1% more volume on the high open than it did in November when it took a nose dive.. then you’ll clearly see that I have no idea what I’m talking about.
I do my DMA everyday through the DSC method (Daily Shitposting & Commenting). It's worked ok so far! (I only started recently) lol
These are the reasons why Daily Moon Averaging (DMA) is the best strategy for most people: 1. Reduces the impact of volatility: you don’t pay attention to the market because you are too busy shitposting to watch charts. 2. Removes the emotional element: it’s hard to be emotional when you’re focusing on commenting on every single new shitpost while churning out your own shitposts. 3. Disciplined approach: it helps stay focused on the long term prospects of moons rather than jumping on every single new hype AI coin with ridiculous APR. 4. Automation: as you continue to shitpost and shitcomment daily, you get so used to it that it becomes automatic and effortless.
I think best strategy for most investors (those that don't have enough money to DCA) is DMA ( Daily Moon Averaging), by being active in cc and helping others you can earn moons every day, which is also some form of free DCA. It may be not worth it for some people, but for others that have no or low income it is great opportunity.
BTC 5 day MA at $23,952 and 200DMA at $23,233 right now per Yahoo chart.
You are (kind of) wrong. Every bull market usually starts 1 year prior to the halving - at least the first "push" to the upside. The next halving is in march 2024 (?) and we're now in february 2023 = approx. 1 year. BTC has also broken the 200DMA which has always been a sign of market reversal. Yes, the bull market-MANIA starts after the halving.
“This potential correction could see BTC retest $20k (200DMA and key support), then in the bullish case, test $25k next. Make $25k support and it's nail in the coffin for the bears.” I might be wrong but I don’t think this will happen in the short term
Every time it rises it is time to sell. It was low throughout the 2020s where BTC's last major move happened. When it increased it was topping. Also what's a bear market? We are above the 200 DMA and about to get a golden cross. Do those things happen in bear markets?
Breaking all key resistances: 20WMA, 200DMA, and finally 20K
As expected btc resistance at 200DMA if we break this and stay above days for couple days ,expect mini bull run
It's funny that your very first point is so amazingly wrong. We have blown through every bottom indicator there is apart from max drawdown, which has to be considered against the fact that the bullrun was a little lacklustre and short. We fell through the previous top. We fell through the 200 DMA. We reached miner capitulation. EADF, Puell Multiple, Hash Ribbons. I could go on. Bitcoin can fall further, that's not the argument I'm opposing. But to say that we don't, on paper, look the most oversold ever, is to not understand these signals.
A technical bear in crypto started in May 2021 when the mania phase ended and DXY fell below the 200 dma for good. Then we had a dead cat bounce which (when that failed) lead us to the main part of the bear market (Dec 2021-Jan 2022). We are now having the late stages of the bear market where we mostly have intermittent accumulation with a double bottom forming (akin to the August 2015 and March 2020 bottoms). So what you see is -most possibly- the tail end of a bear market. How bear market felt was the 1.5 year that brought us here (an intensifying uneasiness leading to a crescendo). In truth the crypto market is a dollar hedge and nothing else. During DXY bull markets you get a crypto bear. During DXY bear markets (below the 200 DMA consistently) you get crypto bulls. Everything else is incidental, the bankruptcies, the halvings, the dead cat bounces, they don't much matter. Crypto is a dollar hedge that's its basic function and maybe only function in the economy. It's all a reverse play to the Dollar, a counter ponzi to the main ponzi... dollar seems to be reversing though, which is why I do not expect this bear to last much more. The Dollar specific characteristics is the only reason this space exists, we rally when it says we rally, we form a top when it says we form a top... that's it really, not a rocket science.
We've been bumping up against and been rejected by the 100 day moving average since we broke the last pattern and got above the 50. Im definitely not an expert but I think the 100 has been heavy resistance and we probably have another move down if we don't decisively pass the 100 DMA and hold it.
Celsius going boom, LUNA exploding, and other events happened several months well after November of last year. Rarely do markets announce a shift from bear to bull or vice versa and the fear and greed index is just one tool used to evaluate a market. It’s important to take the big picture into account such as inflation rates, joblessness, RSI, total volume, on chain activity, developer activity, 50-200 DMA, and others in addition to the F&G index. I do not think these last few days means that the bear is over, but who are we to say it isn’t.
No, that's dumb! Voting with wallet against trillions doller corporation doesn't work. We need to make and enforce anti trust regulations and vote with our voice. Look how EU is forcing apple to allow app outside of app store and allow avoiding apple payment system. Check out DMA