Show Posts
This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
have updated:
1. need python3 now
2. please modify config.json, sample file is config-sample.json
3. now I computer feed price with weight, weight depends on depth, and scale.
support 5 exchange: btc38, yunbi, bter, BTS USD MARKET, BTS CNY MARKET
please use different scale, change file config.json
Can I also point out that any price feed script should add noise to the price feed, both in when it updates (so that nobody can predict exactly when it updates) and in what price it reports (so that nobody can predict exactly what price it will report). If the bid/ask spread is 1%, a price feed script should report a random variable whose mean is the mean of the spread, but that could take any value within there.
If people don't get it I'll post a stronger justification later.
Isn't this free market?
Isn't this supposed to work this way?
My version of the script is extra sensitive to negative price movements 0.1% (at default settings) trigger feed update.
The problem is that the current price feed system does not factor in volume into the spot price, and spot price has little to do with actual valuation in an illiquid market. Look at Mastercoin's market cap, for example, vs its volume. If you were a MSC whale, you'd have a very hard time divesting at the 'spot price'.
A)For each bitAsset you sort all active feeds in ascending order (a delegate's active feed is his last feed if its age is less than 24h).
If the sorted array of active feeds has N elements the (N+1)/2 th element is chosen as median. (Havent actually looked in the code and there could be slight difference but that is the idea)
Sorry, it still isn't clear - are you saying:
A) the median is over N different delegate feeds
B) the median is over N different feeds within one delegate
?
No, I think the actually used price feed is the median of all published ones.
Are you sure its not a median of all current feeds to the current delegate?
I'm fairly sure but maybe someone can verify it.
Actually emski and Markus are wrong.
Well, I do not actually know if they are wrong, but there are smartasses that say that we cannot continue like that! And we must set a bar for the quality of the price feeds. If the price feed is below the said price feed standard (read price) it will no longer be valid (cause they said so!)
The argument goes something like this -"Do you know what will happen if the quality of price feeds go below 90% quality? They will gradually continue to decline until the reach 0, quality...", "Nobody will trust the feeds and they will eventually reach zero".
That's why we will set the standard... and no more crazy non-standard feeds will be allowed.
And it will be awesome after that! <hearts><hearts> many <hearts>
PS
And Dude, if you do not trust the quality feed theory you should go start your own blockchain, experimenting with such unsafe propositions... we are quality feed believers here (well we became such recently, but now in quality feeds we trust!)!
And delegates are free to set trust_level for each exchange which is essentially a weight of that exchange's feed.
Wont that mean each delegate could have a totally different feed price?
before we support this new feature, we should change the price feed logic.
It should include volume from wallet market, and the feed price should relative to volume.
cool, emski yours is working for me now
I still get errors with both emski and xeroc's updated script:
emski:
File "./btsx_feed.py", line 125
volume_in_btc[ mapAsset ].append(float(result[coin.lower()+"_btc"]["vol_btc"])*confi$
^
SyntaxError: invalid syntax
xeroc:
File "/home/user/feed_xeroc/btsx_feed.py", line 433, in <module>
if publish_rule() :
File "/home/user/feed_xeroc/btsx_feed.py", line 47, in publish_rule
elif fabs(myCurrentFeed[asset]-realPrice[asset])/realPrice[asset] > config["change_min"] and\
KeyError: 'change_min'
