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.


Messages - R

Pages: 1 ... 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 [59] 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 ... 69
871
General Discussion / Re: HERTZ - Oscillating Formula Based Asset
« on: June 05, 2017, 11:06:25 pm »
https://github.com/grctest/HERTZ-Price-feed-script/blob/master/min_hertz.hs

I have created a simplified version of the Haskell HERTZ price feed script.

The script no longer scrapes cryptofresh for asset values, doesn't handle json, doesn't output to CSV nor use the turtle library.

The script now runs from the command line and takes 5 arguments:
Code: [Select]
./min_hertz.hs referenceBlock genesisBlock blocksInPeriod amplitude referenceAssetValue
example: ./min_hertz.hs 50 1 100 0.5 25
output: 25.784882
Since you can now enter values easily from the command line as arguments, it will be easier for everyone to test out their own hertz configurations (different frequencies, amplitudes and backing assets).

Any suggestions?

Steemit mirror: https://steemit.com/beyondbitcoin/@cm-steem/hertz-haskell-price-feed-script-update

872
General Discussion / Re: HERTZ - Oscillating Formula Based Asset
« on: June 02, 2017, 02:01:19 pm »
It's be great if the price feed publishing fees were free so that we could have very high frequency HERTZ tokens.

873
General Discussion / Re: HERTZ - Oscillating Formula Based Asset
« on: May 31, 2017, 04:29:15 pm »
I've created issues for HERTZ potential inclusion in xeroc & wackou's price feed scripts (both use python)

https://github.com/wackou/bts_tools/issues/24
https://github.com/xeroc/bitshares-pricefeed/issues/3

874
General Discussion / Re: Will it be love?
« on: May 31, 2017, 12:13:04 am »
Quote from: killzone on May 30, 2017, 11:44:28 pm
I'll be honest, I don't think stealth features align with the next wave of investors.

I firmly believe the first bitcoin run several years ago was driven by people who were on the bleeding edge of tech. I think the wave of people coming into crypto now is the bleeding edge of finance.

I think these people are going to be traders, hedge funds, venture capital, mutual funds.

They are familiar with trading technologies. They are familiar with transactions per second. (things bitshares has) Secret transactions are not critical to them because they don't exist in our current banking world.

Stealth transactions are not important to the future of bitshares.

Why are stealth transactions valuable to the groups listed?  traders, hedge funds, venture capital, mutual funds
I do think stealth is needed to take marketcap from the anon cryptos, as to why they would want private trading - they might not want their every trade data mined? It is a public ledger after all..

Can you buy stealth tokens? I'd love to own a stake..

875
General Discussion / Re: btsbots wallet release v0.0.1
« on: May 30, 2017, 04:44:00 pm »
Can't login? Not getting any warning, just doesn't log in. (No 'wrong password' password when using the right pass).

876
General Discussion / Re: HERTZ - Oscillating Formula Based Asset
« on: May 29, 2017, 01:08:59 pm »
Since CNY is one of the most popular smartcoins on the BTS DEX, perhaps it would be wise to use it as the reference asset instead of USD and/or XDR.

It appears to be leading the poll at the moment too.

877
General Discussion / Re: BlockPay in Serious Trouble
« on: May 27, 2017, 06:33:19 pm »
Quote from: Thom on May 27, 2017, 04:03:16 pm
RE - "disrupting" mumble. My goal in challenging chris4210 was NOT to disrupt the mumble. In fact, it wasn't until 40 minutes into it this discussion occurred. With such an important issue we shouldn't restrict the discussion, and Friday mumble is the perfect venue to make people aware of what is going on. On that note mission accomplished. If that means some topics aren't discussed this week so be it. 1 hour is obviously not enough time to cover everything. I will admit it might have been better had onceupoonatime posted in the beyondbitcoin steemit article that fuzzy publishes each week to officially get on the bbc agenda, but that was addressed in the opening moments when chris / fuzzy asked the audience if other topics should be added to the agenda. So the discussion of stealth was introduced properly and acknowledged as an agenda item that way.

I did not mean to imply that you were disrupting the mumble session, I meant that if we were to all ask in the mumble about this topic one after another we would only get 'no comment' from Chris. I do agree that it's a serious issue that needs resolved, but he's simply not going to divulge anything productive in public (other than fud - eg rebranding/reissuing tokens).

Quote from: Thom on May 27, 2017, 04:03:16 pm
RE - the lack of community interest. I simply don't see many people even willing to ask questions about this mess. @pc in the forum actually said it's not good to make this public. ALL IT TAKES FOR EVIL TO PROSPER IS FOR GOOD MEN TO DO NOTHING. If this were happening to you wouldn't you want the truth to be known? Those wanting to do evil thrive in the darkness of secrecy and it's important to shine a light of truth on them to expose them. How hard can it be to ask a question?
Perhaps because it's really negative and none of us were expecting this mess when we originally invested in Blockpay? If I was a developer who had his pay cut because of a quarrel between my bosses I'd be livid; it's disgusting to withhold employees salaries, doing so is a serious warning that something is wrong (perhaps even breaching EU work rights?). If I was Chris I'd be asking others to host the hangout to avoid the public spotlight until this is all sorted out...

878
General Discussion / Re: Committee Proposal: Network Fee Adjustment 1.10.2657
« on: May 27, 2017, 02:11:03 pm »
We should have a dynamic fee mechanism where we state 'the fees will always be $0.01' (for example) and the settings are automatically adjusted for the exchange rate of BTS.
The majority of the DEX's income comes from registering assets/accounts and LTM, network transactions are a minority and BTS would probably benefit from them being made almost free.

879
General Discussion / Re: BlockPay in Serious Trouble
« on: May 27, 2017, 02:08:04 pm »
Great post @Thom.

RE: Accepting the 'no comment' response - what are we to do? Derail the Bitshares hangout like a broken record repetitively getting the same 'no comment' response? We had other important things to discuss (such as the stealth chat then the beyondbitcoin hangout).

RE: Lack of interest - Don't get me wrong, there's certainly a lot of interest in this however hangouts are not court sessions and as above there's zero further info from Chris for us to work with. As an investor I'm disappointed in the workplace ethics that Chris is currently promoting (withholding dev pay for proj-mgt quarrel) and am mildly annoyed that the deliverables such as the new smartwallet have been delayed because of Chris' actions.

I've removed my proxy vote in Chris, I'd advise others to do so.

880
General Discussion / Re: btsbots wallet release v0.0.1
« on: May 26, 2017, 06:49:23 pm »
Quote from: yvv on May 26, 2017, 04:02:26 pm
Quote from: Customminer on May 26, 2017, 03:13:09 pm
Hey,

Can you add support for the RUBLE Smartcoin please?

Thanks

Edit: My favourite market pairs keep getting erased :(

What's wrong with RUBLE? It looks fine to me.

I was thinking something was wrong, it was showing as 'undefined' for its value :S
I think you're right that it's ok?

881
General Discussion / Re: btsbots wallet release v0.0.1
« on: May 26, 2017, 03:13:09 pm »
Hey,

Can you add support for the RUBLE Smartcoin please?

Thanks

Edit: My favourite market pairs keep getting erased :(

882
General Discussion / Re: HERTZ - Oscillating Formula Based Asset
« on: May 25, 2017, 12:22:16 am »
Quote from: Permie on May 24, 2017, 10:21:58 pm
I'm not sure I understand much of the above correctly, but if traders could make a 1% profit every ~1-4 hours by shorting the asset at the peak, and then buying again at the low, then holding until the peak.

A repetitive bot trading the 4 hour profit cycle (6 x 1% profit opportunities per 24 hours), would make 1.01x their initial investment.
Using a bot to trade each of these cycles every day for a month would create a (Initial-Investment * 1.01^(6*31) equals a 600% increase in capital, just from playing the tick-tock game of 1%

This asset needs to track the value of something that the mainstream will want to hold.
There will be lots of shorters wanting to earn the 1% profit 6 times a day.
BitShares-customers who want to buy CNY (?) at volume in a liquid market will not mind paying a 1% "fee" depending on where they are on the HERTZ cycle.
They won't even notice it

There would be lots of liquidity, shorters are guaranteed profits if there are buyers of the token.
High liquidity looks attractive to potential customers, and gets BitShares on the "front page" of crypto-news, because traders will see volume rankings and BitShares will be up there

Is this the kind of thing you're talking about?
Yes, however I'm initially thinking of a large amplitude (50% fluctuation from feed value) and a period of 1 month, effectively 0.138..% every hour not 1% every 4 hours.

We also need to take into account that not all witnesses publish price feeds for all smartcoins, and frequency of price feed publishes is variable, see: https://roelandp.nl/bitshareswitnesslog/
Thus, high frequency price feed publishing would require convincing the witnesses to shell out.

But the idea can be applied to any amplitude, period, graph function and reference asset. You need to take into account the specific smartcoin options for different algorithms.

---

Edit: There's also phase shift to consider, you could have two tokens which have an opposite phase, canceling each other out.

883
General Discussion / Re: HERTZ - Oscillating Formula Based Asset
« on: May 24, 2017, 06:01:15 pm »
What should the "Percent offset of forced settlements" value be for HERTZ?

Considering that the amplitude is 0.5 (50%), the value will fluctuate from 0.5 to 1.5, if someone was to short the asset into existence at the top and they were to hold the asset/debt until the y value was at 0.5, then the asset will be worth 66% less than when they bought it at the top. If we kept the 1% offset for forced settlement then many users would be force settled during each oscillation.

If we set the percent offset to 70% then the fluctuation of the sin wave wouldn't trigger force settlement, only the volatility of the backing asset.

Would there be any repercussions to setting such a high force settlement percent requirement?

---

Another concern would be whether or not users create tokens with enough collateral to take the change in feed price into account?

---

I've set the max price feed lifetime to 420 minutes, as 7hrs makes for a difference of almost 0.01*Base_reference_asset ($0.01 for example).

---

Any thoughts on the above? I'd appreciate any input.

CM.

884
General Discussion / CFETS MPA?
« on: May 22, 2017, 03:00:12 am »
I like the look of ALTCAP.XDR because it's a basket currency by the IMF, but it's only applied against 5 currencies. https://www.imf.org/external/np/fin/data/rms_sdrv.aspx

The CFETS basket currency by comparison is based on 24 currencies: http://www.chinamoney.com.cn/english/svcnrl/20161229/2047.html

Do you think there would be interest in an MPA based on CFETS?

885
General Discussion / Re: HERTZ - Oscillating Formula Based Asset
« on: May 22, 2017, 01:35:04 am »
Regarding existing price feed scripts written in python such as bitshares-pricefeed by xeroc: https://github.com/xeroc/bitshares-pricefeed/

Reference hero file: https://github.com/xeroc/bitshares-pricefeed/blob/master/bitshares_pricefeed/examples/hero.yaml

hero formula (line 41):
Code: [Select]
formula: 1.05 ** ((date.today() - date(1913, 12, 23)).days / 365.2425) / {quoteSettlement_price}
The haskell script could be replicated in python, or we could use the haskell script to precompute a large CSV of blocknumbers to modify the latest price feed value with.
Code: [Select]
formula: quoteSettlement_price + read_CSV_For_Wave_Value(BlockNumber)
The python price feed script uses time/dates instead of block numbers, so perhaps there will be a difference in computed values between haskell and python.

python implementation? (I don't know python)
Code: [Select]
import math
import date

quoteSettlement_price = XDR
Time_In_Period = one month duration
amplitude = 0.5

x_value = (remainder of ((date.today() - date(Asset_Genesis_Date_Timestamp))/Time_In_Period) divided by 1.00)  // to return 0.xx

feed_price = quoteSettlement_price + (((quoteSettlement_price * amplitude)*(sin((x_value * Time_In_Period)) * ((2*math.pi)/Time_In_Period) ))))

Pages: 1 ... 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 [59] 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 ... 69

Page created in 0.025 seconds with 17 queries.