What Vaniver said. Also, emperically, you can look at the current price/order book on an exchange and see that people are in fact willing to sell you these things. If my holdings represented a life altering sum of money it would be time to take less risk and I would be one of those people.
Sigh. Again, look at the context. There is a claim
it seems possible to have a guaranteed-positive-return trading strategy: investing say 10% of your portfolio in BTC, and constantly trading as required to rebalance your 10% asset allocation.
Ah, you’re disagreeing with the model and phrasing it as “if that model were true, no one would sell you btc, but people are willing to sell, therefore that model is false.” Do I understand?
If so, I do not agree that “if that model were true, no one would sell you btc” is a valid inference.
What Vaniver said. Also, emperically, you can look at the current price/order book on an exchange and see that people are in fact willing to sell you these things. If my holdings represented a life altering sum of money it would be time to take less risk and I would be one of those people.
Sigh. Again, look at the context. There is a claim
Which happens to be wrong.
Ah, you’re disagreeing with the model and phrasing it as “if that model were true, no one would sell you btc, but people are willing to sell, therefore that model is false.” Do I understand?
If so, I do not agree that “if that model were true, no one would sell you btc” is a valid inference.
Essentially, the model says “there is free money lying on the ground, just picking it up is a ‘guaranteed-positive-return trading strategy’.”
I am pointing out that free money lying on the ground is an illusion.