Bitcoin Fractal Projects an Infinite Price

@anonymint · 2020-02-20 02:47 · bitcoin

From the extensive updates to my prior blog, think of a Matryoshka doll:


(click to zoom)


Self-similarity - Wikipedia

Keep the big picture of the repeating fractal pattern and incredible bullishness of Bitcoin in mind:


(click to zoom)

Here’s a copy of the above chart with selected price points displayed (if zoomed of course) for annotated lines to help you understand which annotated lines correspond to the analyses below:


(click to zoom)

(Tangentially on above chart note the golden cross of purple 50 up over the magenta 100 WMA, which instead was death cross under in 2019!)

Here’s the 3D (three day) version of above chart:


(click to zoom)

The annotated horizontal lines point out the fractal correspondence between the current cup & handle pattern with the one in 2019 which led to the $13.9k peak. Note how the cup comes up to the peak prior to the cup before forming the handle.

After the handle (correction), there’s a blow-off, parabolic move to another peak before a new decline and cup & handle ensues. Consecutive fractal patterns are become smaller and more accelerated, but these affine relationships also exist within larger scale self-similarity as can also be seen by zooming in/out on Mandelbrot sets.

So the difficult part which requires a high visual mathematical IQ, is that the current peak and correction — which forms the handle of the cup at the scale in which this current juncture corresponds to May 2019 — also corresponds to both peaks in February and April 2019 at other scales of the self-similar fractal pattern.

So fractal pattern correspondence of the current juncture to late June 2019 $13.9k top (which forms the ongoing handle correction for the larger fractal pattern correspondence) is 3X to 5X accelerated, i.e. 0.33 (⅓) to 0.2 (⅕) of duration. Thus we can expect this correction to be between 0.33 × 0.33 = 0.11 to 0.2 × 0.2 = 0.04 the duration of the ~7 months correction in 2019 from the $13.9k peak to the $6.5k bottom. Thus 1 to 4 weeks for this current handle correction, which began on February 17.

Since this current juncture handle correction also has correspondence to either February 2019 (per the LTC/BTC pattern correspondence mentioned in my prior blog Bitcoin Movements Ahead on the Way to the Moon) or April 2019 (per the bullish, golden crosses of green 50 to yellow 100 and cyan 200 DMA) on the larger (broader) scale fractal pattern, thus a decline to or slightly below the 50 DMA is likely.

Note for my annotated trend lines on the first chart above that the prior $13.9k peak occurred at the junction of the — long-term trend line from the kickoff of the bullish move to the $19.7k peak prior to the $13.9k peak — and the trend line from the kickoff of the bullish move to the said $13.9k peak. And the corresponding ~$40k junction April 30, 2020 of the — trend line from the kickoff of the bullish move to the $13.9k peak prior to the current juncture coming peak — and the trend line from the kickoff of the bullish move to the current juncture coming peak!

That ~$40+k peak just before the May 14, 2020 Bitcoin mining reward halving event, it strongly suggestive of my posited Segwit donations attack on the impostor Bitcoin Core.

I added two trend lines to the following chart as compared to the first chart above, one which intersected at a confluence junction which predicted the $13.9k peak as shown (Bitstamp exchange):


(CLICK TO ZOOM)

The other added trend line is parallel to the trend line it would need to intersection to predict a peak price after $40k by April 30. This projects the next peak price after the May 14, 2020 halving event is infinite U.S. dollars! This seems to confirm the posited Segwit attack valuation model.

Here are the four pertinent trend lines for easier visualization (Kraken exchange):


(CLICK TO ZOOM)

Note if I draw one of the trend lines in another position, there’s seems to be a ~$100k confluence junction February 2021, which I interpret to apply perhaps to Craig Wright’s BSV or to recovery of the posited impostor Bitcoin Core after Core is forced to hardfork (aka hardfuck) it to lower the difficulty so blocks can be mined every 10 minutes instead of once a month or so (although I think the Core chain will be continually 50+% attacked after the Segwit donations attack siphons away all the miners to legacy):




(CLICK TO ZOOM)

The self-similarity (two rightmost boxes and separately two leftmost boxes) fractal pattern depicted below also crudely (because non-linear, affine projection) linearly projects congruently 38 days × 24 months ÷ 14 months = 65 days + Feb. 17, 2020 =Apr. 22, 2020 and ($10.5k − 6.4k = $4.1k ÷ 6.4k = 0.64) ÷ ($4190 − 3330 = $860 ÷ 3330 = 0.26) = 2.5 × ($5.5k - 4.2k = $1.3k ÷ 4.2k = 0.31) × $10.5 = $8.1k + $10.5 =$18.6k:


(CLICK TO ZOOM)

As marked with the mouse on the above chart, I expect that $15+k price in March due to the acceleration of cumulative fractal patterns combined.

Legacy Bitcoin could plausibly attain a $1 million valuation in 2020, posited to be due to the stock-to-flows valuation model and the acceleration of feeding miners ~100+ Segwit donated BTC per mined block:


(click to zoom)

IOW, Bitcoin eventually becomes the new world reserve currency asset and U.S. dollar dies, as I have predicted in many of my blogs such as:

My answers on Quora:

Recent news related to the draconian FATF regulation of cryptocurrency coming:

The European Union’s Fifth Anti-Money Laundering Directive (5AMLD) went into force on Jan. 10, with new regulations for cryptocurrencies, wallets and exchanges

Speaking with CNBC on Friday regarding Bitcoin and the broader cryptocurrency space, Mike Novogratz — incumbent CEO of Galaxy Digital and a former partner at Goldman Sachs — argued:

“We’re going to see something from Treasury in the next few months that kind of puts some guardrails around Bitcoin […]

“We are working with FinCEN, and we will be rolling out new regulations to be very clear on greater transparency so that law enforcement can see where the money is going and that this isn’t used for money laundering.”

[…]

In Chainalysis’ latest report, the blockchain analysis firm found that the value of cryptocurrency spent on dark web markets, where individuals can buy items like fake identification and drugs, surged 60 percent to a “new high” of $601 million in Q4 of 2019.

Chainalysis added that 1 percent of Bitcoin transactions are used for illicit activity — up from the approximately 0.5 percent seen in the year prior

  1. Both proposals foist a new burdensome beneficial ownership reporting requirement on small businesses, while exempting those most able to abuse the financial system.
  2. For decades, the U.S. government has expanded the regulatory burden under the AML regime, requiring financial companies to file millions of reports.
  3. The existing AML framework now costs Americans billions of dollars per year—more than $7 million for every conviction obtained.

[…]

On May 11, 2018, a new FinCEN “Customer Due Diligence” rule took effect that substantially ramped up these requirements. If bankers are having trouble completing these tasks, perhaps the real problem is that Congress should never have treated them as if they were law enforcement officials. Of course, that’s the way that Washington works—this legislation is moving toward passage because large financial institutions are pushing for it.

[…]

Aside from shifting the reporting burden from banks to small businesses, the legislation would create a national corporate ownership database to “facilitate financial institutions’ customer due diligence efforts to confirm information currently obtained during the customer onboarding process.”

This feature raises all kinds of privacy concerns […]

Mnuchin’s comments come at a time when governments worldwide are changing the way they regulate crypto assets to comply with new guidance put forth by the Financial Action Task Force last year. The international body, which creates policies to combat money laundering and the financing of terrorism, is followed by about 200 countries, including the U.S..

Amendment of the Reporting, Procedures, and Penalties Regulations. On June 21, 2019, OFAC published an interim final rule amending the Reporting, Procedures, and Penalties Regulations (the “RPPR”).³⁷ Among other things, the rule revised the RPPR to require all U.S. persons (not just U.S. financial institutions, as had previously been the case) to file rejection reports with OFAC. The rule also amends the RPPR to require rejection reports for all rejected transactions (not just fund transfers, as had previously been the case), including transactions relating to wire transfers, trade finance, securities, checks, foreign exchange, and goods or services. In addition to these new requirements, the interim final rule also expanded the scope of information that OFAC requires to be included on initial and annual reports of blocked property.³⁸

  • Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 120 / Friday, June 21, 2019 / Rules and Regulations

    §501.603 Reports on blocked and unblocked property. (a) Who must report—(1) Holders of blocked property. Any U.S. person (or person subject to U.S. jurisdiction), including a financial institution, holding property blocked pursuant to this chapter or releasing property from blocked status (i.e., unblocking property) pursuant to this chapter shall submit the relevant reports described in this section to the Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC). This requirement applies to all U.S. persons (or persons subject to U.S. jurisdiction) who have or have had in their possession or control any property blocked pursuant to this chapter, including financial institutions that receive and block payments or transfers.

Guidance on Applicability of FinCEN Regulations to Certain Business Models Involving Convertible Virtual Currencies. On May 9, 2019, FinCEN issued interpretive guidance stating that preexisting BSA regulations applied to several common business models involving Convertible Virtual Currencies (“CVCs”).⁸⁸ Covered business models include:

  • Peer-to-Peer Exchangers: Natural persons who engage in transfers between different types of CVCs, as well as exchanges of CVC for other types of value;

[…]

  • Anonymity-Enhanced CVC Transactions: Transactions structured to conceal information otherwise generally available through the distributed public ledger;

[…]

Guidance on Red Flags and Typologies for Suspicious Convertible Virtual Currencies Activity. Also on May 9, 2019, FinCEN issued an advisory regarding the use of virtual currency to support illegal activity, money laundering, and other behavior endangering U.S. national security.⁹⁰ The advisory highlights the capability of virtual currency to be used as an alternative to traditional payment transmission systems, and tracks the rising exploitation of virtual currency in criminal enterprises. The advisory describes multiple virtual currency abuse typologies, including those involving darknet marketplaces, unregistered peer-to-peer exchangers, unregistered foreign-located MSBs, and CVC kiosks, and provides case studies of each. In addition, the advisory discusses several red flags to assist financial institutions in identifying unregistered MSB activity and suspicious virtual currency purchases, transfers, and transactions. The red flags include any connections between a customer’s CVC addresses or IP addresses to darknet or Tor activity; receipt of multiple cash deposits or wires prior to purchasing virtual currency; transmission or receipt of funds or CVCs to or from foreign exchanges or jurisdictions with reputations for being tax havens; operation of CVC kiosks in locations with high incidences of criminal activity; and structuring of transactions just below reporting thresholds or CVC kiosk daily limit to the same wallet address.⁹¹

[…]

On October 11, 2019, the CFTC, FinCEN, and SEC issued a joint statement on activities involving digital assets.¹⁴⁵ In this statement, the agencies discuss the AML/CFT obligations that apply to entities that the BSA defines as “financial institutions,” as well as the factors involved in determining whether and how a person or entity must register with one or more of the different agencies. Each agency also separately provided additional commentary regarding the application of BSA regulations to their specific agencies.

[…]

Considerations for Strengthening Sanctions/AML Compliance

In light of the developments described above, senior management, general counsel, and compliance officers should consider the follow points in strengthening their institutions’ sanctions/AML compliance:

[…]

Continued Caution Around U.S. Dollar Transactions. In its landmark 2017 settlement with CSE Global and CSE TransTel, two Singapore-based companies, OFAC found that they violated U.S. sanctions by sending U.S. dollar payments involving

Payout: 0.000 HBD
Votes: 94
More interactions (upvote, reblog, reply) coming soon.