Apparently its really good at coming up with creative solutions to coding problems. The way it "thinks" about coding is uninhibited by traditional concepts of what commands can or should be used for what, allowing it to generate sleek, perfectly-functioning code.

Very nice, but here's an important question: is the resulting code generated by the AI itself, or is it just being pulled off some page on the internet, based on the real (human) programmer's description and how well it matches the query? In any case, how can one be sure that the code is bug-free? Also, is the AI engine capable of avoiding, detecting, and possibly correcting, bugs that are more complex than syntax errors or simple overflow/memory corruption cases? I'm talking generally here, and not specifically about the code you posted.

The possibilities of an AI generating efficient code that goes beyond conventional coding practices is very exciting, but I would avoid using the generated code in a copy/paste fashion. I'd prefer to have the AI check my own code, in case it can spot bugs I missed. But then, not everyone would want to send their own code to an AI.

Regardless of the above concerns, I'm sure we'll see significant and very exciting developments in the AI field.

Either SBF was a genius.....

Everything that has transpired has done so according to my design.



Or he was a complete and utter imbecile....


I know-ah nothing. I learn the English from a book. I know-ah nothing. How are-ah you? Why you look upset with the anger? What is the bit of a coin? What you lose? I exchange? What is the C I O? I run the company? FTX? What the Fuck TX mean? I know-ah nothing. How are-ah you?

Oh gawd... 


I don't really mind the idea that you are making some short-term measures, but the real measures with long term investing, DCA and other ways of accumulating that might fall into buying on dips and lump sum investments tend to be better measured 4-10 years or longer in advance.  Of course, in bitcoin historically, we have had a lot of fairly regular great bouts of volatility, so there will be periods of time in which a lot of profits can be measured in a short period of time.. but still even if someone might find a lot of profits, even in a one 4-year cycle period, the real compounding seems to take place over a couple of cycles or perhaps more, even though of course there are no real guarantees that UPpity will continue.. 


Of course, part of the difference with you is that you had said that you sold a decent amount of BTC at around $20k.. so I wonder if you even got back all that you sold at around the $20k?  That's one of the risks of selling on the way down rather than on the way up... so usually if you sell on the way up, then you can pretty much structure that you don't lose either way.. so long as the BTC price continues to go up in the long term and you are mostly in profits and you are largely accumulating BTC... but if you are short-term measuring in fiat or even switching your ways of measuring, then you may well ONLY be telling one side of the story.

Another thing is that anyone who started DCA'ing in the past 2-3 years may well still be a decent amount underwater currently.. depending on how they did it in terms of how much front loading that they might have done, whether they employed leverage and/or if they have had a sufficient amount of cashflow and/or dry powder to keep buying when the BTC prices were down (such as below $20k), and we cannot even presume that the $15,479 bottom from November 20 is the lowest that we are going to get for this cycle.

For sure, I would like the BTC price to get back above the 200-week moving average.. which had historically tended to be a floor/bottom price point for BTC (and is currently at about $24,685).. and then I am not sure if I am going to get a lot of confidence that the bottom is in until staying above the 200-week moving average for a significant period of time, and perhaps even getting somewhere close to the 100-week moving average (which is currently at about $37,321).. .. and of course, our ongoing historical low BTC prices and the possibilities that we might have a decent amount of more down (which also is far from guaranteed because we could just go up from here for a bit more, too).. still seems to justify ongoing buying such as DCA for anyone who has not sufficiently and adequately established their BTC stake, which is what?  somewhere between 1% and 25% for normies just getting in (or between 1% and 25% would apply for newbie institutions and newbie governments, too)... if you are just getting into BTC you have to start somewhere  and figure out your level of aggressiveness in terms of what your BTC accumulation levels might be.. how aggressive? and what might be a reasonable/prudent allocation?  Those details can be studied as doing initial reasonable levels of DCA at these prices.. and perhaps a bit of front loading, too?  Don't come crying to me if you lose money?

Hodl?  If you already established your BTC stash prior to 3 years ago, perhaps you can just HODL through this - especially depending on your stash..

Otherwise you should be buying.. it seems to this here kitty.

Another thing?  Have you established your BTC accumulation, such as 1% to 25% or some other level that you personally figured out?  and even if you believe that you have figured out your sufficient/adequate accumulated amount, might you not need to go over those numbers?  perhaps pick up a bit more? Oh? and another question might deal with whether you might have already picked up some more lillie fiends during various points in the dip since about May/June.. bought some in the lower $20ks or even bought some in the sub $20k price arena?  and yes, likely depends on details of your own situation, so blanket HODL seems to be an outlier scenario.... especially given another fact that we likely have 98.62163449% (I am trying to get in the habit of rounding out to 8 intergers after the decimal) or so of the whole world's population that are either low coiners or no coiners.