[drdeca]

The phrasing probably wasn't ideal. I think they meant something different when they said "infinite demand" than what you mean.

I think what they mean is that it assumes that the demand curve, uh, I guess goes off to infinity (or just, some extremely large number which can be practically modeled as "infinity") near the current price,

meaning, that you could sell arbitrarily large amounts of it without substantially decreasing the price that people are willing to pay for it.

Which, yeah, that assumption seems false in practically relevant ways. If you sell a whole lot of [cryptotoken X], the price is likely to go down?

[Black101]

> The phrasing probably wasn't ideal. I think they meant something different when they said "infinite demand" than what you mean.

I think that I understand what you meant. By infinite, they just mean that there will always be orders on both sides around the current price... but for that to happen, you need to have about the same amount of orders on both sides (the amount of orders don't matter and could be very small).

[drdeca]

Why would there have to be equal numbers of orders on both sides? If there are more buy orders than sell orders, that doesn't pose an issue for selling at the, --

oh, because weighting the price between the lowest open sell order and the highest open buy order based on how many there are of each? If the range between them is small enough, I think the effect of this can be neglected.

[Black101]

> Why would there have to be equal numbers of orders on both sides?

I think that it might influence opinions, robots and future orders... and therefore the current price (in the future).