On the road of trading coins, many analysts will predict the BTC trend.
However, my article is different from the vast majority of people.
It is not technical analysis or prediction.
It is also not an abstract analysis or prediction.
My article 'does not belong to predictions'; what I do is describe the situation.
Here are some examples:
A will go to work tomorrow and then leave.
At this time, everyone analyzes that A will go to work tomorrow, and A himself also knows he will go to work tomorrow.
The question arises, can it be guaranteed that he will 100% arrive at the company tomorrow?
As a result, when he wakes up tomorrow, he might sprain his back or fall ill, and with one phone call, he asks for a leave today.
So yesterday, everyone analyzed that A would go to work, but ended up being wrong. Should we blame the back sprain?
Then outsiders will say that this analyst is inaccurate. Obviously, he didn't go to work.
Then the analyst continuously blames, saying it’s impossible not to go to work, claiming their theory is correct, and explaining that a normal person will go to work and leave work.
So why didn't he go to work today? Because of a back sprain?
Why did he sprain his back?
Just because he sprained his back, what more is there to say?
It is clear that A is destined not to arrive at the company tomorrow.
But everyone analyzes going to work, and no one analyzes A's physical condition; otherwise, how could Jacky Cheung's concert suddenly be called off? If virus prevention could be done, wouldn't everything be fine? Why wasn't it done?
My article is not called accuracy rate.
And what is the original question called?
The original question is, will he go to work tomorrow? Or will he leave work tomorrow?
Most analyze a bunch of things saying that tomorrow he will go to work and will leave work, but no one analyzes whether he can get to the company smoothly tomorrow. No one analyzes whether he can leave work smoothly after arriving at the company. (Whether the main player intervenes to raise prices does not mean it will drop if he doesn't intervene. The main player not going to work does not mean he won't leave work.)
Then many people will simplify their own understanding. They simplify it to make it seem like the person looks strong (in appearance), so they judge that he will definitely go to work tomorrow. Then they think that if he will definitely go to work, he will definitely leave work (self-rationalization), using this to justify.
This is called arbitrary analysis, with no sense of responsibility at all.
Thus, my article is about telling you the main player's plans and knowing when he will do what.
The main player will act according to the logic of his thinking, and the outcome is something he does not know.
What is known is that the main player said he could go to work, but in the end, he didn't go to work. At this point, the known situation is that 'whether he goes to work or not does not equal whether he will leave work.' He could also start work later or just go in for an hour to handle an urgent matter and then leave.
As the main player, Musk wants Trump to be elected president. He doesn't just throw money around and then do nothing. He himself won't know the outcome. The result is achieved through the continuous effort he puts in.
This world is alive; do not let your brain become dead. It is not about conforming to theory but conforming to reality.
